HD 
900O 

.9 

U6M6 
1915 


^:*) 


'l^^' 


:    f 


nr  i-^  E 


DAIRY  AND  FOOD  LAWS 


Gift 

MAY    1       1939 


STATE  OF  MICHIGAN 


SUPREME  COURT  DECISIONS 


RELATING  THERETO 


qe>f^t:"e:^]vi:be>f^  i,  1915 


COMPILED  AT  THE  OFFICE  OF  THE 

DAIRY  AND  FOOD  DEPARTMENT 


LANSING,  MICHIGAN 
WYNKOOP  HALLENBECK  CRAWFORD  CO.,  STATE  PRINTERS 

1915 


m 


raiuirif  £xd(JOli» 


DAIRY  AND  FOOD  LAWS 


STATE  OF  MICHIGAN 


SUPREME  COURT  DECISIONS 


SE:^F^TrE:^Ni:BEi^  i,  iqi5 


COMPILED  AT  THE  OFFICE  OF  THE 

DAIRY  AND  FOOD  DEPARTMENT 


LANSING,  MICHIGAN 
WYNKOOP  HALLENBECK  CRAWFORD  CO.,  STATE  PRINTERS 

1915 


*52l^  ^  /ty    Va.-«v1^   C^V/  C 


/      -         /      **,**» 


DEPT. 


LAWS  OF  MICHIGAN 

RELATIVH  TO  INSPECTION   AND  ADULTERATION  OF  FOODS 
AND  DRUGS 


POWERS  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  COMMISSIONER 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner,  and  to  define  his  powers  and  duties  and  fix 
his  compensation. 

(Act  No.  211,  Public  Acts,  1893.) 

1.  (C.  L.,  4973)  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State 
of  Michigan  enact,  That  within  thirty  days  after  this  act 
shall  take  effect,  the  Governor  by  and  with  the  consent  of 

>'  the  Senate,  shall  appoint  a  suitable  person  to  be  Dairy 
0    and  Food  Commissioner,  which  office  is  hereby  created, 
'"     and  which  commissioner  so  appointed  shall  hold  his  office 
^   until  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
*^  dred  and  ninety-five  and  until  his  successor  is  appointed 
\^  and  qualified.     At  the  next  regular  session  of  the  legis- 
■  lature  and  every  two  years  thereafter,  the  Governor,  by 
^  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  shall  ap- 
point a  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  who  shall  hold 
his  office  for  the  term  of  two  years  from  the  first  day  of 
January  in  the  year  of  his  appointment  and  until  his 
successor  is  appointed  and  qualified. 

2.  (C.  L.,  4974)  Sec.  2.  The  governor  shall  have 
power  to  remove  such  commissioner  at  any  time  in  his 
discretion ;  but  the  reasons  for  such  removal  shall  be  laid 
before  the  Senate  at  the  next  regular  or  special  session  of 
the  legislature  thereafter,  and  in  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the 
office  of  commissioner  from  any  cause,  the  Governor  may 
appoint  another  person  to  fill  the  same. 


Ni35034: 


STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


^.  3..  ..(.a  ^L.,.. 4^75).  Bee.  3.  Before  entering  upon  the 
duifesM'hispjfficejvthe  person  so  appointed  shall  make, 
subscribe,  and  file  in  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  State, 
an  oath  of  office  in  the  form  prescribed  by  section  one  of 
article  eighteen  of  the  constitution  of  this  State,  and 
shall  enter  into  bonds  with  the  people  of  the  State  of 
Michigan  in  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  with  sure- 
ties to  be  approved  by  the  Governor,  conditioned  for  the 
faithful  performance  of  his  duties. 

4.  (C.  L.,  4976)  Sec.  4.  Said  commissioner  shall  re- 
ceive an  annual  salary  of  two  thousand  dollars.  The 
said  commissioner  is  hereby  authorized  and  empowered, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  governor,  to 
appoint  a  deputy  commissioner.  The  salary  of  the  deputy 
commissioner  shall  be  fifteen  hundred  dollars  per  annum. 
The  said  commissioner  may  also  appoint  eight  regular  in- 
spectors, who  shall  receive  an  annual  salary  not  to  ex- 
ceed one  thousand  dollars  per  year,  and  such  other 
special  inspectors  as  the  proper  performance  of  the  duties 
of  the  office  may  require,  which  special  inspectors  shall 
be  paid  not  to  exceed  three  dollars  per  day  for  the  time 
actually  employed:  Provided,  That  the  whole  sum  paid 
to  such  special  inspectors  shall  not  exceed  the  income 
to  said  department  derived  from  registration  fees  pro- 
vided by  law.  The  persons  so  appointed  shall  have  power 
to  administer  oaths  in  all  matters  relative  to  the  dairy 
and  food  laws  and  shall  take  and  subscribe  the  consti- 
tutional oath  of  office  and  file  the  same  in  the  office  of 
the  secretary  of  state;  and  they  shall  hold  office  during 
the  pleasure  of  the  commissioner.  The  inspectors  shall 
have  the  same  right  of  access  to  the  places  to  be  in- 
spected as  the  said  commissioner  or  his  deputy.  The 
commissioner  shall  appoint  such  clerks  as  he  may  deem 
necessary  for  the  transaction  of  the  business  of  his  office. 
The  salaries  and  expenses  authorized  by  this  section 
shall  be  for  the  unexpired  part  of  the  fiscal  year  ending 
June  thirty,  nineteen  hundred  five,  and  each  fiscal  year 
thereafter.  Said  salaries  are  to  be  paid  monthly  on  the 
warrant  of  the  auditor  general.     The  actual  and  neces- 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS. 


sary  expenses  of  the  commissioner,  deputy  and  inspect- 
ors, in  the  performance  of  their  official  duties,  shall  be 
audited  by  the  state  board  of  auditors  and  paid  upon  the 
warrant  of  the  auditor  general.  Such  compensation  and 
expenses  shall  be  certified,  audited  and  paid  in  the  same 
manner  as  salaries  and  expenses  paid  similar  officers. 
The  deputy  commissioner  and  regular  inspectors  shall 
enter  into  bonds  with  the  people  of  the  state  of  Michigan 
in  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  each,  with  sureties 
to  be  approved  by  the  commissioner,  conditioned  for  the 
faithful  performance  of  their  respective  duties.  The 
board  of  state  auditors  shall  provide  office  room,  and  the 
necessary  furniture  and  fixtures  and  the  necessary  sta- 
tionery, supplies  and  printing  for  the  conducting  of  the 
business  of  said  commissioner,  on  his  application  to  said 
board  therefor.  Said  office  shall  be  and  remain  in  the 
city  of  Lansing. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P.  A. 
1897s  Am.  by  Act  No  186,  P.  A.  1901.  Am.  by  Act  Nb.  230, 
P.  A.  1903.  Am.  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.  Am.  by  Act  No. 
18,  P.  A.  1913.] 

5.  (C.  L.,  4977)  Sec.  5.  The  commissioner,  by  and 
with  the  consent  of  the  Governor,  shall  appoint  a  suitable 
and  competent  person  as  State  Analyst,  who  shall  be  a 
practical  analytical  chemist.  The  commissioner,  in  like 
manner,  may  appoint  an  assistant  chemist.  Before  en- 
tering upon  the  duties  of  their  offices,  the  analyst  and 
assistant  chemist  shall  take,  subscribe  and  file  in  the 
office  of  the  Secretary  of  State  the  constitutional  oath  of 
office.  Their  term  of  office  shall  continue  during  the 
pleasure  of  the  commissioner.  The  Board  of  State  Audi- 
tors shall  provide  a  room  in  connection  with  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  for  the  laboratory  of  the  State 
Analyst  and  his  assistant,  and  the  necessary  furniture 
and  fixtures  therefor.  In  case  of  the  absence  or  inability 
of  the  State  analyst  or  his  assistant  to  perform  his  duty, 
the  commissioner  may  appoint  some  competent  person  to 
perform  the  same  temporarily,  which  person  shall  take, 


6  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

subscribe  and  file  the  constitutional  oath  of  office.  The 
salaries  and  expenses  authorized  by  this  section  shall  be 
for  the  unexpired  part  of  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
thirty,  nineteen  hundred  five,  and  each  fiscal  year  there- 
after, said  salaries  to  be  payable  monthly  on  the  warrant 
of  the  Auditor  General.  The  salary  of  the  chemist  shall 
be  not  to  exceed  two  thousand  dollars;  the  salary  of  the 
assistant  chemist  shall  be  not  to  exceed  twelve  hundred 
dollars.  The  actual  and  necessary  expenses  of  the  chemist 
and  the  assistant  chemist,  in  the  performance  of  their 
official  duties,  shall  be  audited  by  the  Board  of  State 
Auditors,  and  paid  upon  the  warrant  of  the  Auditor  Gen- 
eral. Such  an  amount  as  is  found  to  be  necessary  in  the 
proper  performance  of  the  work  of  the  analyst  may  be 
expended  for  chemical  supplies.  Such  compensations, 
expenses  and  supplies  shall  be  certified,  audited  and  paid 
in  the  same  manner  as  the  salaries,  expenses  and  sup- 
plies of  similar  officers. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P.  A. 
1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  186,  P.  A.  1901.  Am  by  Act  No.  230, 
P.  A.  1903.     Am.  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.] 

6.  (C.  L.,  4978)  Sec.  6.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  to  carefully  inquire  into 
the  dairy  and  food  and  drink  products  and  the  several 
articles  which  are  foods  or  drinks,  or  the  necessary  con- 
stituents of  foods  or  drink,  which  are  manufactured  or 
sold  or  exposed  or  offered  for  sale  in  this  State,  and  he 
may,  in  a  lawful  manner,  procure  samples  of  the  same 
and  direct  the  State  Analyst  to  make  due  and  careful 
examination  of  the  same,  and  report  to  the  commissioner 
the  result  of  the  analysis  of  all  and  any  of  such  food  and 
drink  products  or  dairy  products  as  are  adulterated,  im- 
pure or  unwholesome  in  contravention  of  the  laws  of  this 
State;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  commissioner  to 
make  a  complaint  against  the  manufacturer  or  vendor 
thereof  in  the  proper  county  and  furnish  all  evidence 
thereof,  to  obtain  a  conviction  of  the  offense  charged. 
Th€  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  or  his  deputy,  or  any 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS. 


person  appointed  by  him  for  that  purpose  may  make  com- 
plaint and  cause  proceedings  to  be  commenced  against 
any  person  for  the  enforcement  of  any  of  the  laws  rela- 
tive to  adulterated,  impure  or  unwholesome  food  or  drink, 
and  in  such  case  he  shall  not  be  obliged  to  furnish  se- 
curity for  costs  and  shall  have  power,  in  the  performance 
of  his  duties,  to  enter  into  any  creamery,  factory,  store, 
salesroom,  drug  store,  or  laboratory,  or  place  where  he 
has  reason  to  believe  food  or  drink  is  made,  stored,  sold 
or  offered  for  sale  and  open  any  cask,  tub,  jar,  bottle  or 
package  containing,  or  supposed  to  contain,  any  article 
of  food  or  drink  and  examine  or  cause  to  be  examined  the 
contents  thereof,  and  take  therefrom  samples  for  analy- 
sis. The  person  making  such  inspection  shall  take  such 
sample  of  such  article  or  product  in  the  presence  of  at 
least  one  witness,  and  he  shall  in  the  presence  of  said 
witness,  mark  or  seal  such  sample  and  shall  tender  at 
the  time  of  taking  to  the  manufacturer  or  vendor  of  such 
product,  or  to  the  person  having  the  custody  of  the  same, 
the  value  thereof,  and  a  statement  in  writing  for  the  tak- 
ing of  such  sample.  Whenever  it  is  determined  by  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspectors, 
that  filthy,  or  unsanitary  conditions  exist  or  are  per- 
mitted to  exist  in  the  operation  of  any  bakery,  confection- 
ery, or  ice  cream  plant,  or  in  any  place  where  any  food 
or  drink  products  are  manufactured,  stored,  deposited  or 
sold  for  any  purpose  whatever,  the  proprietor  or  pro- 
prietors, o^vner  or  owners,  of  such  bakery,  confectionery 
or  ice  cream  plant,  or  any  person  or  persons,  owning 
or  operating  any  plant  where  any  food  or  drink  products 
are  manufactured,  stored,  deposited  or  sold,  shall  be  first 
notified  and  warned  by  the  commissioner,  his  deputy  or 
inspectors  to  place  such  bakery,  confectionery  or  ice 
cream  plant,  or  any  place  where  any  food  or  drink  prod- 
ucts are  manufactured,  stored,  deposited  or  sold  in  a 
sanitary  condition  within  a  reasonable  length  of  time; 
and  any  person  or  persons  owning  and  operating  any 
bakery,  confectionery  or  ice  cream  plant  or  any  place 
where   any   food   or   drink   products   are    manufactured. 


8  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

stored,  deposited  or  sold,  failing  to  obey  such  notice  and 
warning,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon 
conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished. by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  tAventy-five  dollars  nor  more  than  three  hundred 
dollars  and  costs  of  prosecution,  or  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  not  to  exceed  ninety  days,  or  until  such  fine 
and  costs  are  paid,  or  both  fine  and  imprisonment  at  the 
discretion  of  the  court. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P.  A. 
1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  268,  P  A.  1899.  Am.  by  Act  No.  12, 
P.  A.   1905.] 

7.  (C.  L.,  4979)  Sec.  7.  The  commissioner,  his  deputy 
or  any  person  by  said  commissioner  duly  appointed  for 
that  purpose,  is  authorized  at  all  times  to  seize  and  take 
possession  of  any  and  all  food  and  dairy  products,  sub- 
stitutes therefor,  or  imitation  thereof  kept  for  sale,  ex- 
posed for  sale  or  held  in  possession  or  under  the  control 
of  any  person  which  in  the  opinion  of  the  said  commis- 
sioner or  his  deputy  or  such  person  by  him  duly  ap- 
pointed, shall  be  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  this  act  or 
other  laws  which  now  exist  or  which  may  be  hereafter 
enacted. 

First,  The  person  so  making  such  seizure  as  aforesaid, 
shall  take  from  such  goods  as  seized  a  sample  for  the  pur- 
pose of  analysis  and  shall  cause  the  remainder  thereof  to 
be  boxed  and  sealed  and  shall  leave  the  same  in  the  pos- 
session of  the  person  from  whom  they  were  seized,  sub- 
ject to  such  disposition  as  shall  hereafter  be  made  there- 
of according  to  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Second,  The  person  so  making  such  seizure,  shall  for- 
ward the  sample  so  taken  to  the  State  Analyst  for  analy- 
sis, who  shall  make  an  analysis  of  the  same  and  shall 
certify  the  results  of  such  analysis,  which  certificate  shall 
be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  fact  or  facts  therein  certi- 
fied to  in  any  court  where  the  same  may  be  offered  in 
evidence. 

Third,  If  upon  such  analysis  it  shall  appear  that  said 
food  or  dairy  products  are  adulterated,  substitutes  or  im- 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  9 

itations  within  the  meaning  of  this  act,  said  commis- 
sioner, or  his  deputy  or  any  person  by  him  duly  author- 
ized may  make  complaint  before  any  justice  of  the  peace 
or  police  justice  having  jurisdiction  in  the  city,  village  or 
township  where  such  goods  were  seized,  and  thereupon 
said  justice  of  the  peace  shall  issue  his  summons  to  the 
person  from  whom  said  goods  were  seized,  directing  him 
to  appear  not  less  than  six  nor  more  than  twelve  days 
from  the  date  of  the  issuing  of  said  summons  and  show 
cause  why  said  goods  should  not  be  condemned  and  dis- 
posed of.  If  the  said  person  from  whom  said  goods  were 
seized  cannot  be  found  said  summons  shall  be  served 
upon  the  person  then  in  possession  of  the  goods.  The  said 
summons  shall  be  served  at  least  six  days  before  the  time 
of  appearance  mentioned  therein.  If  the  person  from 
whom  said  goods  were  seized  cannot  be  found,  and  no  one 
can  be  found  in  possession  of  said  goods,  and  the  defend- 
ants shall  not  appear  on  the  return  day,  then  said  justice 
of  the  peace  shall  proceed  in  said  cause  in  the  same  man- 
ner provided  by  law  where  a  writ  of  attachment  is  re- 
turned not  personally  served  upon  any  of  the  defendants 
and  none  of  the  defendants  shall  appear  upon  the  return 
day. 

Fourth,  Unless  cause  to  the  contrary  thereof  is  sho,wn, 
or  if  said  goods  shall  be  found  upon  trial  to  be  in  viola- 
tion of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act  or  other  laws 
which  now  exist  or  which  may  be  hereafter  enacted,  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  said  justice  of  the  peace  or  police 
justice  to  render  judgment  that  said  seized  property  be 
forfeited  to  the  State  of  Michigan,  and  that  the  said 
goods  be  destroyed  or  sold  by  the  said  commissioner  for 
any  purpose  other  than  to  be  used  for  food.  The  mode  of 
procedure  before  said  justice  shall  be  the  same,  as  near 
as  may  be  as  in  civil  proceedings  before  justices  of  the 
peace.  Either  parties  may  appeal  to  the  circuit  court  as 
appeals  are  taken  from  justices'  courts,  but  it  shall  not 
be  necessary  for  the  people  to  give  any  appeal  bond. 

Fifth,  The  proceeds  arising  from  any  such  sale  shall  be 
paid  into  the  State  treasury  and  credited  to  the  general 


10  -   STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

fund :  Provided,  That  if  the  owner  or  party  claiming  the 
property  or  goods  so  declared  forfeited  can  produce  and 
prove  a  written  guarantee  of  purity,  signed  by  the  whole- 
saler, jobber,  manufacturer  or  other  party  from  whom 
said  articles  were  purchased,  then  the  proceeds  of  the 
sale  of  such  articles,  over  and  above  the  cost  of  seizure, 
forfeiture,  and  sale,  shall  be  paid  over  to  such  owner  or 
claimant  to  reimburse  him,  to  the  extent  of  such  surplus, 
for  his  actual  loss  resulting  from  such  seizure  and  for- 
feiture, as  shown  by  the  invoice. 

Sixth,  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  prosecuting  attorney 
when  called  upon  by  said  commissioners  or  by  any  per- 
son by  him  authorized  as  aforesaid,  to  render  any  legal 
assistance  in  his  power  in  proceedings  under  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act,  or  any  subsequent  act  relative  to  the 
adulteration  of  food,  for  the  sale  of  impure  or  unwhole- 
some food  or  food  products. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  268,  P.  A. 
1899.     Am.  by  Act  No.  230,  P.  A.  1903.] 

8.  (C.  L.,  4980)  Sec.  8.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  the 
State  Analyst,  while  he  holds  his  office  to  furnish  to  any 
individual,  firm  or  corporation,  any  certificate  as  to  the 
purity  or  excellence  of  any  article  manufactured  or  sold 
by  them  to  be  used  as  food  or  in  the  preparation  of 
food. 

9.  (C.  L.,  4981)  Sec.  9.  The  commissioner  shall  make 
an  annual  report  to  the  Governor  on  or  before  the  first 
day  of  July  in  each  year,  and  which  shall  be  printed  and 
published  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  September  next 
thereafter,  which  report  shall  cover  the  doings  of  his 
office  for  the  preceding  fiscal  year,  which  shall  show, 
among  other  things,  the  number  of  manufactories  and 
other  places  inspected  and  by  whom,  the  number  of  speci- 
mens of  food  articles  analyzed,  and  the  State  Analyst's 
report  upon  each  one;  the  number  of  complaints  entered 
against  persons  for  violation  of  the  laws  relative  to  the 
adulteration  of  food,  the  number  of  convictions  had,  and 
the  amount  of  fines  imposed  therefor,  together  with  such 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  11 

recommendations  relative  to  the  statutes  in  force  as  his 
experience  may  justify.  The  commissioner  shall  also  pre- 
pare, print  and  distribute  to  all  the  papers  of  the  State, 
and  to  such  persons  as  may  be  interested  or  may  apply 
therefor,  a  monthly  bulletin,  in  suitable  paper  covers, 
containing  results  of  inspections,  the  results  of  analyses 
made  by  the  State  Analyst,  with  popular  explanation  of 
the  same,  and  such  other  information  as  may  come  to  him 
in  his  official  capacity  relating  to  the  adulteration  of 
food  and  drink  products  and  of  dairy  products,  so  far  as 
he  may  deem  the  same  of  benefit  and  advantage  to  the 
public ;  also  a  brief  summary  of  all  the  work  done  during 
the  month  by  the  commissioner  and  his  assistants  in  the 
enforcement  of  the  laws  of  the  State,  but  not  more  than 
ten  thousand  copies  of  each  such  monthly  bulletin  shall 
be  printed. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.     Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P.  A. 
1897.     Am.  by  Act  No.  268,  P.  A.  1899.] 

10.  (C.  L.,  4982)  Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall 
wilfully  hinder  or  obstruct  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner, or  his  deputy  or  other  person  or  inspector  by  him 
duly  authorized,  in  the  exercise  of  the  powers  conferred 
upon  him  by  this  act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  on  conviction  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of 
not  less  than  ten  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dol- 
lars, or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  less 
than  ten  days  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or  both  such 
fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

[Added   by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.   1895.] 

11.  (C.  L.,  4983)  Sec.  11.  The  sum  of  thirty-five 
thousand  dollars  is  hereby  appropriated  for  the  fiscal 
year  ending  June  30,  nineteen  hundred  six,  and  for 
each  fiscal  year  thereafter,  there  is  hereby  appropriated 
the  sum  of  thirty-five  thousand  dollars.  Out  of  the 
amounts  appropriated  by  this  act  shall  be  paid  all  sal- 
aries and  expenses  and  chemical  supplies  provided  for 


12  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

therein:  Provided,  That  all  expenses  for  stationery  and 
printing  shall  be  audited  and  paid  in  the  same  manner 
as  other  State  printing  and  stationery. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P.  A. 
1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  268,  P.  A.  1899.  Am.  by  Act  No.  186,  P. 
A.  1901.     Am.  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.] 

12.  (C.  L.,  4984)  Sec.  12.  The  Auditor  General  is 
hereby  directed  to  annually  add  to  and  incorporate  into 
the  State  tax,  to  be  levied  each  year,  the  sum  of  thirty- 
five  thousand  dollars,  which,  when  collected,  shall  be 
credited  to  the  general  fund  to  reimburse  the  same  for 
the  money  appropriated  by  this  act. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  245,  P.  A.  1895.  Am.  by  Act  No.  154,  P. 
A.  1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  268,  P.  A.  1899.  Am.  by  Act  No.  186, 
P.  A.  1901.  Am.  by  Act  No.  230,  P.  A.  1903.  Am.  by  Act  No. 
12,  P.  A.   1905.] 

13.  Sec.  13.  It  shall  also  be  the  duty  of  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  to  foster  and  encourage  the 
dairy  industry  of  the  State,  and,  for  that  purpose,  he 
shall  investigate  the  general  conditions  of  the  creameries, 
cheese  factories,  condensed  milk  factories,  skimming  sta- 
tions, milk  stations  and  farm  dairies  in  this  State,  with 
full  power  to  enter  upon  any  premises  for  such  investiga- 
tion, with  the  object  in  view  of  improving  the  quality 
and  creating  and  maintaining  uniformity  of  the  dairy 
products  of  the  State;  and  should  it  become  necessary, 
in  the  judgment  of  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  he 
may  cause  instruction  to  be  given  in  any  creamery,  cheese 
factory,  condensed  milk  factory,  skimming  station,  milk 
station  or  farm  dairy,  or  in  any  locality  in  this  State, 
and  in  order  to  secure  the  proper  feeding  and  care  of 
cows,  or  the  practical  operation  of  any  plant  producing 
dairy  products,  and  in  order  to  secure  such  a  uniform 
and  standard  quality  of  dairy  products  in  this  State,  he 
shall  furnish  a  sufficient  number  of  competent  inspectors, 
the  appointment  of  whom  is  provided  for  in  section  four 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  13 


of  this  act,  and  they  shall  be  duly  qualified  to  act  as  such 
inspectors. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.] 

14.  Sec.  14.  Whenever  it  is  determined  by  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspectors,  that 
any  person  is  using,  selling  or  furnishing  to  any  skim- 
ming station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk 
factory,  milk  depot,  farm  dairy,  milk  dealer,  the  retail 
trade  or  to  any  consumer  of  milk,  any  impure  or  un- 
wholesome milk  or  cream,  which  impurity  or  unwhole- 
someness  is  caused  by  the  unsanitary  or  filthy  condition 
of  the  premises  where  cows  are  kept,  or  by  the  unsanitary 
or  filthy  care  or  handling  of  the  cows,  or  from  the  use  of 
unclean  utensils,  or  from  unwholesome  food,  or  from  any 
other  cause,  the  person  so  using,  selling  or  furnishing 
to  any  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  con- 
densed milk  factory,  milk  depot,  farm  dairy,  milk  dealer, 
the  retail  trade,  or  to  any  consumer  of  milk,  any  such 
milk  or  cream,  shall  fii*st  be  notified  and  warned  by  the 
commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspectors  not  to  use,  sell, 
or  furnish  such  milk  or  cream  to  such  skimming  station, 
creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  factory,  milk 
depot,  farm  dairy,  milk  dealer,  the  retail  trade,  or  to  any 
consumer  of  milk,  and  any  person  failing  to  obey  such 
notice  and  warning  and  continuing  to  use,  sell  or  furnish 
to  any  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  con- 
densed milk  factory,  farm  dairy,  milk  dealer  or  to  the 
retail  trade  such  impure  or  unwholesome  milk  or  cream, 
shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction 
thereof,  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  less  than  ten  dol- 
lars, nor  more  than  fifty  dollars,  and  costs  of  prosecu- 
tion, or  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail,  not  to  exceed 
ninety  days,  or  until  such  fine  and  costs  are  paid,  or  both 
fine  and  imprisonment  at  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.] 

15.  Sec.  15.    Whenever  it  is  determined  by  the  Dairy 


14  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

and  Food  Commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspectors,  that 
unsanitary  conditions  exist  or  are  permitted  to  exist  in 
the  operation  of  any  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese 
factory,  condensed  milk  factory,  milk  depot  or  farm 
dairy,  the  proprietor  or  proprietors,  or  manager  of  said 
skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed 
milk  factory  or  farm  dairy,  shall  be  first  notified  and 
warned  by  the  commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspectors  to 
place  such  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory, 
condensed  milk  factory,  milk  depot  or  farm  dairy  in  a 
sanitary  condition,  within  a  reasonable  length  of  time; 
and  any  person  or  persons  owning  or  operating  such 
skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed 
milk  factory,  milk  depot  or  farm  dairy,  failing  to  obey 
such  notice  and  warning,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more 
than  three  hundred  dollars,  and  costs  of  prosecution,  or 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail,  not  to  exceed  ninety 
days  or  until  such  fine  and  costs  are  paid,  or  both  fine 
and  imprisonment  at  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.] 

16.  Sec.  16.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  proprietor  or 
proprietors,  (manager  or  managers),  of  every  skimming 
station,  creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  factory 
or  milk  or  cream  depot  in  the  State  where  milk  or  cream 
is  received  by  purchase  or  otherwise  from  three  or  more 
persons  within  thirty  days  after  the  commencement  of 
the  operation  of  said  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  fac- 
tory or  milk  or  cream  depot  and  annually  on  the  first  day 
of  April  thereafter  to  register  with  the  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner  upon  blanks  furnished  by  said  ofiicial,  the 
location  of  such  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  fac- 
tory, condensed  milk  factory  or  milk  or  cream  depot,  and 
the  name  of  its  owner  or  owners  and  manager.  And  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  proprietor  or  proprietors  or  man- 
ager of  every  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese  factory, 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  15 

condensed  milk  factory  or  milk  or  cream  depot  in  this 
State,  where  milk  or  cream  is  received  by  purchase  or 
otherwise  from  three  or  more  persons,  to  file  a  report 
with  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  said  report  to 
be  made  on  or  before  April  first  of  each  year,  upon 
blanks  furnished  by  said  official,  and  to  show  the  amount 
of  milk  or  cream  received  by  said  skimming  station, 
creamery,  cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  factory  or  milk 
or  cream  depot  during  the  year  ending  December  31  pre- 
ceding; and  said  report  shall  show  the  amount  of  but- 
ter, cheese  or  condensed  milk  manufactured  during  the 
year,  together  with  a  list  of  the  names  and  postoffice  ad- 
dresses of  the  patrons  of  said  skimming  station,  cream- 
ery, cheese  factory,  condensed  milk  factory  or  milk  or 
cream  depot.  Every  skimming  station,  creamery,  cheese 
factory,  condensed  milk  factory  or  milk  or  cream  depot, 
so  registering  and  so  reporting,  shall  pay  to  the  office  of 
the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  an  annual  regis- 
tration fee  of  five  dollars,  to  be  paid  at  the  time  of  such 
registration.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  section,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  for  each  and  every  offense  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine 
of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred 
dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment 
in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than  thirty  days  or  both. 
The  money  so  collected  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sion shall  be  paid  into  the  State  Treasury  and  be  used 
to  help  defray  the  expenses  of  the  office  of  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner,  in  addition  to  the  annual  appropria- 
tion therefor. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.  1905.  Am.  by  Act  No.  242,  P.  A. 
1913.] 

17.  Sec.  17.  Any  person,  persons  or  corporation  who 
shall  sell  milk  or  cream  from  a  wagon  or  other  convey- 
ance, depot  or  store,  or  who  shall  sell  or  deliver  milk  or 
cream  to  a  hotel,  restaurant,  boarding  house  or  any  pub- 
lic place,  shall  be  considered  a  milk  dealer;  and  every 
milk  dealer  who  shall  sell  milk  or  cream  from  a  wagon 


16  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


or  other  conveyance,  depot  or  store,  or  who  shall  sell,  or 
deliver  milk  or  cream  to  a  hotel,  restaurant,  boarding 
house  or  any  public  place  in  any  city,  town  or  village  of 
this  State,  must  first  obtain  a  license  from  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  to  sell  such  milk  or  cream.  A 
license  shall  be  required  for  each  wagon  or  other  convey- 
ance, depot  or  store.  Each  dealer  shall  pay  to  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  a  license  fee  of  one  dollar  for 
each  license  so  granted,  which  license  must  be  obtained 
on  or  before  the  first  day  of  July  of  each  year.  The 
moneys  received  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner, 
in  payment  of  such  licenses,  shall  be  paid  into  the  State 
Treasury  and  be  used  to  help  defray  the  expense  of  the 
office  of  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  in  addition  to 
the  annual  appropriation.  All  licenses  shall  be  used  only 
in  the  name  of  the  owner  of  the  wagon,  depot  or  store, 
and  shall,  for  the  purpose  of  this  act,  be  prima  facie  evi- 
dence of  ownership.  No  license  shall  be  sold,  assigned 
or  transferred.  Each  license  shall  record  the  name,  resi- 
dence, place  of  business,  number  of  wagons,  depots  or 
stores  used  (where  more  than  one  is  employed)  and  the 
number  of  the  license.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section,  insofar  as  relates  to  registration 
and  the  securing  of  licenses,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and  for  each  and  every  offense  shall  be 
punished  by  a  fine  not  less  than  five  dollars,  nor  more 
than  twenty-five  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or 
by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than 
thirty  days,  or  both. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.   A.   1905.] 

18.  Sec.  18.    Kepealed  by  Act  No.  135,  P.  A.  1915. 

19.  Sec.  19.  The  published  annual  report  of  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  which  shall  be  made  to  the  Gov- 
ernor, shall  include  a  complete  accounting  of  all  moneys 
received  by  the  department  from  every  source,  and  the 
amount  expended  by  the  department. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.   A.   1905.] 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  17 


20.  Sec.  20.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 
with  this  act  so  far  as  they  are  inconsistent  are  hereby 
rej)ealed. 

This  act  is  ordered  to  take  immediate  effect. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  12,  P.  A.   1905.] 


(Act  No.  167,  Public  Acts,  1899.) 

AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  of  the  State   of  Michigan. 

21.  Section  1.  Th€  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  That  any  person  who  shall  obstruct  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner,  or  his  deputy,  or  any  of  his  duly  ap- 
pointed inspectors,  by  refusing  to  allow  him  entrance  to 
any  place  where  he  is  authorized  to  enter  in  the  discharge 
of  his  official  duty,  or  refuses  to  deliver  to  him  a  suffi- 
cient samjile  for  the  analysis  of  any  article  of  food  or 
drink  sold,  offered  or  exposed  for  sale,  or  in  his  posses- 
sion for  the  purpose  of  sale,  wherever  the  same  may  be 
found,  when  the  same  is  requested  and  when  the  value 
thereof  is  tendered,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine 
of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  one 
hundred  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  not  less  than  ten  days  or 
more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprison- 
ment in  the  discretion  of  the  court,  for  each  and  every 
offense. 

This  act  is  ordered  to  take  immediate  effect. 
3 


18  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

STANDARDS. 

(Act  No.  64,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  define  and  fix  standards  of  purity  for  foods,  bever- 
ages, condiments,  confectionery  and  drugs  in  this  state  in 
prosecutions  arising  under  the  food,  beverage  and  drug  laws 
of  the  state  of  Michigan. 

22.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  In  all  prosecutions  arising  under  the  food  and 
drug  laws  of  this  State  for  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  an 
adulterated,  misbranded  or  otherwise  unlawful  article  of 
food,  drink,  condiment  or  drug,  the  latest  standards  of 
purity  for  food  products,  established  by  the  United 
States  secretary  of  agriculture,  shall  be  accepted  as  the 
legal  standards,  except  in  cases  where  other  standards 
are  specifically  prescribed  by  the  laws  of  this  State. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  19 


GENERAL  FOOD  LAW. 

(Act   No.    193,    Public   Acts,   1895.) 

AN  ACT  to  prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration,  fraud  and  de- 
ception in  the  manufacture,  and  sale  of  articles  of  food  and 
drink. 

23.  (C.  L.,  5010)  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State 
of  Michigan  enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  by 
themselves  or  their  agents  or  servants  shall  within  this 
State,  have  in  their  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  offer 
or  expose  for  sale,  or  sell  any  article  of  food  which  is 
adulterated  or  misbranded  within  the  meaning  of  this  act. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  118,  P.  A.  1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  162,  P.  A. 
1913.] 

24.  (C.  L.,  5011)  Sec.  2.  The  term  food  as  used 
herein,  shall  include  all  articles  used  for  food,  drink,  con- 
fectionery or  condiment  intended  to  be  eaten  or  drank 
by  man  or  other  animals,  whether  simple,  mixed  or  com- 
pound. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  162,  P.  A.  1913.] 

25.  (0.  L.,  5012)  Sec.  3.  An  article  shall  be  deemed 
to  be  adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  this  act : 

First,  If  any  substance  or  substances  have  been  mixed 
with  it  so  as  to  lower  or  depreciate  or  injuriously  affect 
its  quality,  strength  or  jnirity ; 

Second,  If  any  inferior  or  cheaper  substance  or  sub- 
stances have  been  substituted  wholly  or  in  part  for  it; 

Third,  If  any  valuable  or  necessary  constituent  or  in- 
gredient has  been  wholly  or  in  part  abstracted  from  it; 

Fourth,  If  it  consists  wholly  or  in  part  of  a  diseased, 
decomposed,  putrid,  infected,  tainted  or  rotten  animal 
or  vegetable  substance  or  article,  whether  manufactured 


20  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

or  not,  or  in  the  case  of  milk,  if  it  is  the  product  of  a 
diseased  animal; 

Fifth,  If  it  is  colored,  coated,  polished,  bleached  or 
powdered  whereby  damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed,  or 
if  by  any  means  it  is  made  to  appear  better  or  of  greater 
value  than  it  really  is; 

Sixth,  If  it  contains  any  added  substance  or  ingredient 
which  is  poisonous  or  injurious  to  health:  Provided, 
That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  prevent  the  coloring  of 
pure  butter. 

Sec.  3  (a).  An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  mis- 
branded  within  the  meaning  of  this  act : 

First,  If  it  is  an  imitation  of  or  is  offered  for  sale  under 
the  name  of  another  article ; 

Second,  If  it  is  labeled  or  branded  so  as  to  deceive 
or  mislead  the  purchaser,  or  purport  to  be  a  foreign  prod- 
uct when  not  so,  or  if  the  contents  of  the  package  as 
originally  put  up  shall  have  been  removed  in  whole  or  in 
part  and  other  contents  shall  have  been  placed  in  such 
package ; 

Third,  If  in  package  form  every  package,  box,  bottle, 
basket  or  other  -  container  does  not  bear  the  true  net 
weight,  excluding  the  wrapper  or  container,  which  shall 
be  stated  in  terms  of  pounds,  ounces  and  grains  avoirdu- 
pois weight  or  the  true  net  measure,  which  measure,  in 
case  of  liquids,  shall  be  in  terms  of  gallons  of  two  hundred 
and  thirty-one  cubic  inches  or  fractions  thereof,  as  quarts, 
pints  and  ounces  or  the  true  numerical  count,  as  the 
case  may  be,  expressed  on  the  face  of  the  principal  label 
in  plain  English  words  or  numerals,  so  that  it  can  be 
plainly  read:  Provided,  however.  That  reasonable  varia- 
tions shall  be  permitted  and  tolerances  therefor  and  also 
exemptions  as  to  small  packages  shall  be  established  and 
promulgated  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner:  Pro- 
vided, however,  That  no  penalty  of  fine,  imprisonment  or 
confiscation  shall  be  enforced  for  any  violation  of  sub- 
division third  of  this  section  prior  to  September  first, 
nineteen  hundred  fourteen,  as  to  goods  in  the  hands  of 
wholesalers  or  retailers  when  this  act  takes  effect  or  re- 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  21 


ceived  prior  to  January  one,  nineteen  hundred  fourteen. 
The  })rovisi<)n.s  of  this  subdivision  shall  not  apply  to 
beverages  in  glass  containers; 

Fourth,  If  the  package  containing  it  or  its  label  shall 
bear  any  statement,  design  or  device  regarding  the  in- 
gredients or  the  substances  contained  therein,  which 
statement,  design  or  device  shall  be  false  or  misleading  in 
any  particuhir:  Provided,  That  the  provisions  of  this  art 
shall  not  apply  to  mixtures  or  compounds  recognized  as 
ordinary  articles  or  ingredients  of  articles  of  food,  if 
each  and  every  package  sold  or  offered  for  sale  bear  the 
name  and  address  of  the  manufacturer  or  jobber  or  retail 
merchant  with  an  established  business,  and  be  distinctly 
labeled  under  its  own  distinctive  name,  and  in  a  manner 
so  as  to  plainly  and  corectly  show  that  it  is  a  mixture 
or  compound  and  is  not  in  violation  of  any  of  the  fore- 
going provisions  of  this  act.  Every  article  of  food  as 
defined  in  the  statutes  of  this  State  shall  be  sold  by 
weight,  measure  or  numerical  count  and  as  now  generally 
recognized  by  trade  custom,  except  where  the  parties 
otherwise  agree,  and  shall  be  labeled  in  accordance  with 
the  provisions  of  the  food  and  beverage  laws  of  this  State. 
Only  those  products  shall  be  sold  by  numerical  count 
which  cannot  well  be  sold  by  weight  or  measure.  All 
foods  not  liquid,  if  sold  by  measure,  shall  be  sold  by 
standard  dry  measure,  the  quart  of  which  contains  sixty- 
seven  twenty  one-hundredths  cubic  inches,  providing  that 
the  provisions  of  this  section  shall  not  apply  to  fresh 
fruit  and  vegetables. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  118,  P.  A.  1897.  Am.  by  Act  No.  162,  P.  A. 
1913.     Am.  by  Act  No.  311,  P.  A.  1915.] 

20.  (C.  L.,  5013)  Sec.  4.  No  person,  by  himself  or 
his  agents  or  servants,  shall  manufacture  for  sale  or 
offer  or  expose  for  sale,  or  sell,  as  butter,  and  the  legiti- 
mate product  of  the  dairy  or  creamery,  any  article  not 
made  exclusively  of  milk  or  cream,  but  into  which  the  oil 
or  fat  of  animals,  or  any  other  oils  not  produced  from 
milk,  enters  as  a  component  part,  has  been  introduced  to 


22  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

take  the  place  of  cream.  Whoever  violates  the  provisions 
of  this  section  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine 
of  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars, 
and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail,  or  the  State  House  of  Correction  and  Re- 
formatory at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  ninety  days  nor 
more  than  two  years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprison- 
ment in  the  discretion  of  the  court  for  each  and  every 
offense. 

27.  Sec.  5.  No  person  shall  manufacture,  deal  in, 
sell,  offer  or  expose  for  sale  or  exchange,  any  article  or 
substance  in  the  semblance  of,  or  in  imitation  of  cheese 
made  exclusively  of  unadulterated  milk  or  cream,  or  both, 
into  which  any  animal,  intestinal  or  offal  fats  or  oils  or 
melted  butter  in  any  condition  or  state,  or  modification 
of  the  same,  or  oleaginous  substances  of  any  kind  not 
produced  from  unadulterated  milk  or  cream  shall  have 
been  introduced.  All  cheese  manufactured  or  sold  within 
this  State  shall  be  divided  into  two  grades,  to  be  known 
as  "full  cream  cheese"  and  ''skimmed  milk  cheese."  All 
full  cream  cheese  shall  contain  in  water  free  substance 
not  less  than  thirty  per  centum  of  milk  fat,  as  may  ap- 
pear upon  proper  test,  and  all  cheese  containing  less  than 
thirty  per  centum  of  milk  fat  shall  be  known  and  branded 
as  ''skimmed  milk  cheese" :  Provided,  That  the  provisions 
of  this  act  shall  not  be  construed  to  apply  to  such  cheese 
as  is  known  as  "fancy  cheese"  and  is  under  five  pounds  in 
weight  each,  nor  to  what  is  known  as  "Swiss  cheese," 
"brick  cheese,"  "Dutch  cheese"  or  "cottage  cheese,"  and 
does  not  contain  anything  injurious  to  health. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  73,  P.  A.  1913.] 

28.  Sec.  6.  Every  manufacturer  of  full  cream  cheese 
may  put  a  brand  upon  each  cheese,  indicating  "full  cream 
cheese,"  and  no  person  shall  use  such  a  brand  upon  any 
cheese  made  from  milk  from  which  any  of  the  cream  has 
been  taken.  Every  manufacturer  of  imitation  cheese,  as 
defined  by  this  act,  shall  put  a  brand  upon  each  cheese  so 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  2» 

manufactured,  indicating  "skimmed  milk  cheese,"  which 
brand  shall  be  in  plain  Roman  letters,  not  less  than  one- 
half  inch  in  length,  and  so  made,  placed  or  attached  that 
it  can  easil}'  be  seen  and  read  and  cannot  be  easily  de- 
faced, and  the  same  shall  be  placed  upon  the  cloth  sur- 
rounding such  cheese,  as  well  as  upon  the  container 
thereof. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.   118,  P.  A.  1897.     Am.  by  Act  No.  73,  P.  A. 

11)13.] 

29.  Sec.  7.  The  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  shall 
procure  and  issue  to  the  cheese  manufacturers  of  the 
State,  on  proper  application,  which  application  shall  be 
made  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  April  in  each  year, 
and  under  such  regulation  as  to  the  custody  and  use 
thereof  as  he  may  prescribe,  a  uniform  stencil  brand, 
bearing  a  suitable  device  or  motto  and  the  words  ''Michi- 
gan full  cream  cheese,"  or  "Michigan  skimmed  milk 
cheese."  Every  such  brand  shall  be  used  on  the  outside 
of  the  cheese,  and  upon  the  package  containing  the 
same,  and  shall  bear  a  separate  number  for  each  separate 
factory.  The  said  commissioner  shall  keep  a  book  in 
which  shall  be  registered  the  name,  location  and  number 
of  each  manufactory  using  the  brand,  and  the  name  or 
names  of  persons  at  each  factory  authorized  to  use 
the  same.  The  commissioner  shall  receive  a  fee  of  one 
dollar  for  each  registration,  said  fee  to  be  paid  by  the 
party  applying  for  the  same,  which  amount  shall  be 
accounted  for  and  used  as  a  part  of  the  fund  appro- 
priated for  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  of  this  State  with 
which  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  is  charged.  No 
person  shall  knowingly  offer,  sell  or  expose  for  sale,  in 
any  package,  cheese  which  is  falsely  branded  or  labeled. 
Whoever  shall  violate  the  provisions  of  sections  five,  six 
seven  or  eight  of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  five 
hundred  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  the  Michigan  Reforma- 


24  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

tory  at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  ninety  days  nor  more  than 
two  years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the 
discretion  of  the  court  for  each  and  every  offense. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  73,  P.  A.  1913.] 

30.  Sec.  8.  The  proprietor  or  keeper  of  any  hotel, 
restaurant,  eating  saloon,  boarding  house  or  other  place 
where  imitation  cheese  is  sold  or  furnished  to  persons 
paying  for  the  same,  shall  have  placed  on  the  walls  of 
every  store  or  room  where  imitation  cheese  is  sold  or 
furnished,  a  white  placard  on  which  is  printed  in  black 
ink,  in  plain  Roman  letters  of  not  less  than  three  inches 
in  length,  and  not  less  than  two  inches  in  width,  the 
words  Skimmed  Milk  Cheese  Sold  or  Used  Here,"  and 
shall  at  all  times  keep  the  same  exposed  in  such  con- 
spicuous place  as  to  be  readily  seen  by  any  and  all  per- 
sons entering  such  store,  or  other  room  or  rooms,  and 
anj  person  or  persons  violating  this  section  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  punished  as  pro- 
vided in  section  seven  of  this  act. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  73,  P.  A.  1913.] 

81.  (C.  L.,  5018)  Sec.  9.  No  person  shall  within 
this  State  manufacture  for  sale,  have  in  his  possession 
with  intent  to  sell,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  or  sell  as  lard, 
Siuy  substance  not  the  legitimate  and  exclusive  product 
of  the  fat  of  the  hog. 

32.  (C.  L.,  5019)  Sec.  10.  Every  person  who  manu- 
factures for  sale,  has  in  his  possession  with  intent  to 
sell,  offers  or  exposes  for  sale,  or  sells,  any  substance 
made  in  the  semblance  of  lard,  or  as  an  imitation  of 
lard,  and  which  consists  of  any  mixture  or  compound  of 
animal  or  vegetable  oils  or  fats  other  than  hog  fat,  in  the 
form  of  lard,  shall  cause  the  tierce,  barrel,  tub,  pail  or 
package  containing  the  same  to  be  distinctly  and  legibly 
branded  or  labeled  "Lard  substitute  or  compound,"  and 
every  person  who  manufactures  for  sale,  has  in  his  pos- 
>session  with  intent  to  sell,  offers  or  exposes  for  sale  or 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  25 

sells,  any  substance  made  in  the  semblance  of  lard  or  as 
an  imitation  of  lard,  or  as  a  substitute  for  lard,  and 
which  is  designed  to  take  the  place  of  lard,  and  which 
consists  of  any  mixture  or  compound  of  lard  with  ani- 
mal or  vegetable  oils  or  fats,  shall  cause  the  tierce,  bar- 
rel, tub,  pail  or  package  containing  the  same  to  be  dis- 
tinctly and  legibly  branded  or  labeled  eithefr  "Adul- 
terated lard,''  "Lard  compound,"  or  "Lard  substitute." 
Buch  brands  or  labels  shall  be  in  letters  not  less  than 
one  inch  in  length  and  shall  be  followed  with  the  name 
of  the  maker  and  factory,  and  the  locati(m  of  such  fac- 
tory. 

33.  (C.  L.,  5020)  Sec.  11.  Every  dealer  or  trader 
who,  by  himself  or  agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of 
another  person,  offers  or  exposes  for  sale,  or  sells  any 
form  of  lard  substitute  or  adulterated  lard,  as  herein- 
before defined,  shall  securely  affix  or  cause  to  be  affixed 
to  the  package  wherein  the  same  is  contained,  offered 
for  sale  or  sold,  a  label  upon  the  outside  and  face  of 
which  is  distinctly  and  legibly  printed  in  letters  not 
less  than  one-half  inch  in  length,  the  words  "Lard  sub- 
stitute" or  "Adulterated  lard"  or  "Lard  compound"  or 
other  appropriate  word  which  shall  correctly  express  its 
nature  and  use. 

34.  (C.  L.,  5021)  Sec.  12.  The  having  in  possession 
of  any  lard  substitute  or  adulterated  lard  or  lard  com- 
pound, as  hereinbefore  defined,  which  is  not  branded  or 
labeled  as  hereinbefore  required  and  directed,  upon  the 
part  of  any  dealer  or  trader,  or  any  person  engaged  in 
the  public  sale  of  such  articles,  shall  for  the  purpose  of 
the  act  be  deemed  prima  facie  evidence  of  intent  to  sell 
the  same. 

35.  (C.  L.,  5022)  Sec.  13.  No  person,  firm  or  cor- 
poration in  this  State  shall  manufacture  for  sale,  or  sell, 
or  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  as  fruit  jelly  or  fruit  butter, 
any  jelly  or  imitation  fruit  butter  or  other  similar  com- 
pound made  or  composed  in  whole  or  in  part  of  glucose, 
dextrine,  starch  or  other  substances,  and  colored  in  imi- 
tation of  fruit  jelly  or  fruit  butter;  nor  shall  any  such 


26  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

jelly,  fruit  butter  or  compound  be  manufactured  or  sold, 
or  offered  for  sale,  under  any  name  or  designation  what- 
ever, unless  the  same  shall  be  composed  entirely  of  in- 
gredients not  injurious  to  health,  and  shall  not  be  colored 
in  imitation  of  fruit  jelly,  and  every  can,  pail  or  package 
of  such  jelly  or  butter  sold  in  this  State  shall  be;  dis- 
tincty  and  durably  labeled  "Imitation  fruit  jelly  or  but- 
ter," with  the  name  of  the  manufacturer  and  the  place 
where  made.  Whoever  violates  the  provisions  of  this  sec- 
tion shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  when 
convicted  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  fifty  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  State  House  of  Correc- 
tion and  Reformatory  at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  ninety 
days  nor  more  than  two  years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and 
imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

36.  (C.  L.,  5023)  Sec.  14.  No  packer  or  dealer  in 
preserved  or  canned  fruits  and  vegetables,  or  other 
articles  of  food,  shall  sell  or  offer  for  sale  such  canned 
articles,  unless  such  articles  shall  be  entirely  free  from 
substances  or  ingredients  deleterious  to  health,  and  un- 
less such  articles  bear  a  mark,  stamp,  brand  or  label  bear- 
ing the  name  and  address  of  the  firm,  person  or  corpora- 
tion that  packs  or  distributes  the  same.  All  "soaked  or 
bleached  goods"  or  goods  put  up  from  products  dried  be- 
fore canning,  shall  be  plainly  marked,  branded,  stamped 
or  labeled  as  such,  with  the  words  "soaked  or  bleached 
goods,"  in  letters  not  less  than  two-line  pica  in  size,  show- 
ing the  name  of  the  article  and  the  name  and  address  of 
the  packer  or  distributor. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  226,  P.  A.  1915.] 

37.  (C.  L.,  5024)  Sec.  15.  No  person  shall  manu- 
facture or  sell,  or  offer  for  sale  any  manufactured  or 
artificial  coffee  berry  in  imitation  of  the  genuine  berry. 
No  person  shall  manufacture,  sell  or  offer  or  expose  for 
sale  any  ground  or  prepared  coffee,  which  is  adulterated 
with  chicory  or  other  substance  not  injurious  to  health, 
unless  each  package  thereof  shall  be  distinctlv  labeled  or 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  27 


marked  ^'Coffee  compound,"  together  with  the  name  and 
address  of  the  manufacturer  or  compounder  thereof,  and 
has  no  other  label  of  whatever  name  or  designation.  No 
person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  have  in  his  posses- 
sion with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  any  molasses,  syrup  or 
glucose,  unless  the  barrel,  cask,  keg,  can  or  pail  contain- 
ing the  same  shall  be  distinctly  branded  or  labeled  with 
the  true  and  appropriate  name ;  nor  shall  any  person  offer 
or  expose  for  sale,  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to 
sell,  or  sell  any  molasses  or  syrup  mixed  with  glucose, 
unless  the  barrel,  cask,  keg  or  pail  containing  the  same 
be  distinctly  branded  or  labeled  "Glucose  mixture,"  and 
the  per  cent  in  which  glucose  enters  into  its  composition. 
Such  barrel,  cask,  keg  or  pail  shall  be  branded  or  labeled 
in  a  conspicuous  place;  and  such  brands  or  labels  shall 
be  in  letters  of  not  less  than  one-half  inch  in  length. 
Glucose  and  glucose  mixtures  shall  have  no  other  desig- 
nation than  herein  required. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  118,  P.  A.  1897.] 

38.  (C.  L.,  5025)  Sec.  16.  No  person  shall  within 
this  State  manufacture,  brew,  distill,  have  or  offer  for 
sale,  or  sell,  any  spirituous  or  fermented  or  malt  liquors, 
containing  any  substance  or  ingredient  not  normal  or 
healthful,  to  exist  in  spirituous,  fermented  or  malt 
liquors,  or  which  may  be  deleterious  or  detrimental  to 
health  when  such  liquors  are  used  as  a  beverage. 

39.  (C.  L.,  5026)  Sec.  17.  The  taking  of  orders  or 
the  making  of  agreements  or  contracts,  by  any  person, 
firm  or  corporation,  or  by  any  agent  or  representative 
thereof,  for  the  future  delivery  of  any  of  the  articles, 
products,  goods,  wares  or  merchandise  embraced  within 
the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall  be  deemed  a  sale  within 
the  meaning  of  this  act. 

40.  (C.  L.,  5027)  Sec.  18.  Whoever  shall  falsely 
brand,  mark,  stencil  or  label  any  article  or  product  re- 
quired by  this  act  to  be  branded,  marked,  stenciled,  or 
labeled,  or  shall  remove,  alter,  deface,  mutilate,  obliter- 
ate, imitate  or  counterfeit  any  brand,  mark,  stencil  or 


28  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

label  so  required,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  nor  more  than  one 
thousand  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  State  House  of  Correc- 
tion and  Keformatory  at  Ionia,  for  not  less  than  six 
months  nor  more  than  three  years,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court  for  each 
and  every  offense. 

41.  (C.  L.,  5028)  Sec.  19.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of 
the  acts  or  things  prohibited,  or  wilfully  neglect  or  re- 
fuse to  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things  enjoined  by  this  act, 
or  in  any  way  violate  any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  Avhere  no  specific 
penalty  is  prescribed  by  this  act  shall  be  punished  by  a 
fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  nor  more  than  five  hun- 
dred dolars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for 
a  period  of  not  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such 
fine  and  imprisonment,  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  117,  P.  A.  1899.] 

42.  (C.  L.,  5029)  Sec.  20.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  of  the  State  to  investigate 
all  complaints  of  violations  of  this  act,  and  take  all  steps 
necessary  to  its  enforcement.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all 
prosecuting  officers  of  this  State  to  prosecute  to  com- 
pletion all  suits  brought  under  the  provisions  of  this  act 
upon  the  complaint  of  the  commissioner  or  of  any  citi- 
zen. It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  food  inspectors  in  cities 
to  examine  all  complaints  made  to  them  of  violation  of 
this  act,  and  to  render  assistance  in  enforcing  its  pro- 
visions. It  shall  also  be  the  duty  of  all  health  boards  in 
cities  and  health  officers  in  townships  to  take  cognizance 
of  and  report  or  prosecute  all  violations  of  this  act  that 
may  be  brought  to  their  notice,  or  they  may  have  cog- 
nizance of,  within  their  jurisdiction. 

43.  Sec.  21.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 
with  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  29 

BUCKWHEAT  FLOUR. 

(Act   No.    208,  Public  Acts,   1903.) 

AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  buckwheat 

flour. 

44.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  Within  this  State  no  person  shall  manufacture, 
offer  or  expose  for  sale,  keep  in  possession  with  intent  to 
sell,  or  sell,  any  ground  buckwheat  containing  any  pro- 
duct of  wheat,  corn,  rice  or  other  foreign  substance, 
unless  each  and  every  package  thereof  be  distinctly  and 
legibly  branded  or  labeled  "Buckwheat  Flour  Compound" 
in  letters  not  less  than  one-half  inch  in  length  and  be 
followed  with  the  name  of  the  maker  and  factory  and  the 
location  of  such  factory. 

45.  Sec.  2.  Any  brand  or  label  herein  required  shall 
be  an  inseparable  part  of  the  general  or  distinguishing 
label,  and  such  label  shall  be  that  principal  and  conspicu- 
ous sign  under  which  it  is  sold,  and  any  other  label  or 
printed  matter  upon  the  package  shall  not  be  in  contra- 
vention of  the  requirements  of  this  act. 

46.  Sec.  3.  The  having  in  possession  of  any  buck- 
wiieat  flour  compound,  which  is  not  branded  or  labeled 
as  hereinbefore  rec^uired  and  directed  upon  the  part  of 
any  person  engaged  in  the  public  or  private  sale  of  such* 
article,  shall,  for  the  purpose  of  this  act,  be  deemed  prima 
facie  evidence  of  intent  to  sell  the  same. 

47.  Sec.  4.  The  taking  of  orders  or  the  making  of 
agreements  or  contracts  by  any  person,  firm  or  corpora- 
tion or  by  any  agent  or  representative  thereof,  for  the 
future  delivery  of  buckwheat  flour  compound  shall  be 
deemed  a  sale  within  the  meaning  of  this  act. 

48.  Sec.  5.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things 
prohibited,  or  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  enjoined  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violate  any  of 
the  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 


30  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  less  than  twenty-five 
dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by  impris- 
onment in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not  less  than 
thirty  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

49.  Sec.  6.  Act  number  eighty-four  of  the  Public  Acts 
of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  entitled  "An  Act  to 
prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration,  fraud  and  deception 
in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  buckwheat  flour,"  being 
section  four  thousand  nine  hundred  ninety-four  to  five 
thousand  two,  both  inclusive,  of  the  Compiled  Laws  of 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  ninety -seven  is  hereby  re- 
pealed. 


VINEGAR. 

Act  No.  384,  Session  Laws  1913. 

AN  ACT  in  relation  to  th,e  manufacture  and  sale  of  vinegar, 
and  to  repeal  act  number  seventy-one  of  the  Public  Acts  of 
eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  being  sections  five  thousand 
three  to  five  thousand  six  inclusive  of  the  Compiled  Laws  of 
eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  and  all  other  acts  and  parts 
of  acts  inconsistent  with  this  act. 

50.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact ^  No  person  shall  manufacture  for  sale,  offer  or  ex- 
pose for  sale,  sell  or  deliver,  or  have  in  his  possession 
with  intent  to  sell  or  deliver,  any  vinegar  not  in  com- 
pliance with  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

51.  Sec.  2.  The  word  "vinegar"  as  used  herein  is  lim- 
ited to  a  water  solution  of  acetic  acid  derived  by  the  al- 
coholic and  subsequent  acetous  fermentations  of  fruits, 
grain,  vegetables,  sugar  or  syrups,  and  if  not  distilled 
must  carry  in  solution  the  extractive  matter  derived 
solely  from  the  substances  indicated  on  the  label  as  its 
source. 

52.  Sec.  3.     No  vinegar  shall  be  sold  or  exposed  for 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  81 


sale  as  apple  or  cider  vinegar  which  is  not  the  legitimate 
product  of  pure  apple  juice.  The  term  "cider  vinegar" 
as  used  herein  shall  be  construed  to  mean  vinegar  de- 
rived by  the  alcoholic  and  subsequent  acetous  fermenta- 
tion of  the  expressed  juice  of  apples,  the  acidity,  solids 
and  ash  of  which  have  been  derived  exclusively  from  ap- 
ples, and  which  contains  not  less  than  four  per  cent  of 
absolute  acetic  acid.  Cider  vinegar  which  during  the 
course  of  manufacture  has  developed  in  excess  of  four 
per  cent  acetic  acid,  may  be  reduced  to  a  strength  of  not 
less  than  four  per  cent,  and  cider  vinegar  so  reduced  shall 
not  be  regarded  as  adulterated.  Every  manufacturer  or 
producer  of  cider  vinegar  shall  plainly  brand  on  the  head 
of  the  cask,  barrel  or  keg  or  other  container  of  such 
vinegar,  his  name,  place  of  business  and  the  words  "fer- 
mented cider  vinegar,''  and  no  person  shall  mark  or  brand 
as  cider  vinegar  any  package  containing  that  which  is  not 
cider  vinegar.  Any  vinegar  sold  or  offered  for  sale  shall 
be  marked  or  branded  plainly  upon  the  package  or  con- 
tainer from  which  it  is  sold  and  also  on  the  original 
package  or  container  in  which  it  is  sold  or  delivered,  in 
a  manner  to  show  its  true  character  and  source. 

53.  Sec.  4.  All  sugar  vinegar  sold  or  exposed  for  sale 
as  such  shall  be  strictly  and  distinctly  fermented  from 
sucrose,  molasses  or  refiner's  syrup. 

54.  Sec.  5.  No  vinegar  shall  be  sold  or  exposed  for 
sale  as  malt  vinegar  which  is  not  fermented  strictly  and 
distinctly  from  barley  malt,  or  cereals  whose  starch  has 
been  converted  to  malt. 

55.  Sec.  6.  No  vinegar  shall  be  sold  or  exposed  for 
sale  in  which  foreign  substances,  drugs  or  acids  shall 
have  been  introduced.  No  vinegar  shall  contain  any  arti- 
ficial coloring  matter,  and  all  vinegar  shall  have  an  acid- 
ity of  not  less  than  four  per  cent  by  weight  of  absolute 
acetic  acid.  If  vinegar  contains  any  artificial  matter,  or 
less  than  the  required  amount  of  acidity,  it  shall  be 
deemed  to  be  adulterated. 

56.  Sec.  7.  All  vinegar  made  by  fermentation  and 
oxidation  without  the  intervention  of  distillation,  shall 


32  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

be  branded  "fermented''  vinegar,  with  the  name  of  the 
fruit  or  substance  from  which  such  vinegar  has  been 
made. 

57.  Sec.  8.  All  vinegar  made  by  acetous  fermenta- 
tion of  dilute  distilled  alcohol  shall  be  branded  "dis- 
tilled" vinegar,  together  with  the  name  of  the  substance 
or  substances  from  which  it  is  made,  and  all  vinegar 
made  wholly  or  in  part  from  distilled  vinegar  shall  be 
conspicuously  labeled  "distilled  vinegar." 

58.  Sec.  9.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  act  shall,  upon  conviction,  be  punished  by  a  fine  of 
not  more  than  two  hundred  dollars  or  imprisonment  in 
the  county  jail  not  to  exceed  six  months  or  both  such 
fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

59.  Sec.  10.  Act  number  seventy-one  of  the  Public 
Acts  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  being  sections 
five  thousand  three  to  five  thousand  six  of  the  Compiled 
Laws  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  and  all  other 
acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  this  act  are 
hereby  repealed. 


MILK. 

Act  No.  26,   Public  Acts,   1873.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  and  punish  offenders  for  the  adulteration 
of  milk,  and  the  products  made  therefrom,  and  to  repeal  an 
act  entitled  "An  act  to  prevent  the  adulteration  of  milk  and 
to  prevent  the  traffic  in  impure  and  unwholesome  milk,"  ap- 
proved March  thirty-first,  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-one. 

60.  (C.  L.,  11411)  Section  1.  The  People  of^  the 
State  of  Michigan  enact,  That  whoever  shall  knowingly 
sell  to  any  person  or  persons,  or  sell,  deliver  or  bring  to 
be  manufactured  to  any  cheese  or  butter  manufactory  in 
this  State,  an'y  milk  diluted  with  water,  or  in  any  way 
adulterated,   or  milk   from   which   anv   cream   has   been 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS. 


taken,  or  milk  commonly  known  as  ''skimmed  milk,"  or 
shall  keep  back  any  part  of  the  milk  known  as  "strip- 
pings,"  with  intent  to  defraud,  or  shall  knowingly  sell 
milk,  the  product  of  a  sick  or  diseased  animal  or  animals 
or  any  milk  j^i'oduced  from  any  cow  fed  upon  the  refuse 
of  a  distillery,  or  of  a  brewery,  or  upon  any  substance 
deleterious  to  the  quality  of  the  milk,  or  shall  knowingly 
use  any  poisonous  or  any  deleterious  material  in  the 
manufacture  of  any  cheese  or  butter,  or  shall  knowingly 
sell  or  offer  to  sell  any  cheese  or  butter,  in  the  manufac- 
ture of  which  any  poisonous  or  deleterious  substance  has 
been  used,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
on  conviction  thereof  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  ten  dol- 
lars nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  and  may  be  com- 
mitted to  the  county  jail  until  such  fine  shall  be  paid: 
Provided,  That  such  imprisonment  shall  not  exceed 
ninety  days;  and  shall  be  liable  in  double  the  amount  of 
damages  to  the  person  or  persons,  firm,  association,  or 
corporation  upon  which  such  fraud  shall  have  been  com- 
mitted. An  act  entitled  "An  act  to  prevent  the  adultera- 
tion of  milk  and  to  prevent  the  traffic  in  impure  and  un- 
wholesome milk,"  approved  March  thirty-first,  eighteen 
hundred  and  seventy-one,  is  hereby  repealed:  Provided, 
That  any  right  accrued  or  forfeiture  incurred  under  said 
act,  shall  remain  valid  and  binding,  and  may  be  enforced 
under  said  act  as  if  the  same  were  not  repealed. 


(Act  No.  246,  Public  Acts,  1887.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  the  sale  of  impure,  unwholesome,  adulter- 
ated, or  swill  milk  in  the  State  of  Michigan,  and  to  provide 
for  inspectors. 

61.     (C.   L.,   11412)      Section   1.     The  People   of  the 
State  of  Michigan  enactj  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for 
any  person,  either  by  himself  or  agent,  to  sell  or  expose 
5 


34  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN, 

for  sale  within  the  State  of  Michigan  any  unwholesome 
watered,  or  adulterated  or  impure  milk  or  swill  milk  or 
colostrum  or  milk  from  cows  kept  upon  garbage,  swill 
or  any  substance  in  a  state  of  fermentation  or  putre- 
faction or  other  deleterious  substances,  or  from  cows  kept 
in  connection  with  any  family  in  which  there  are  infec- 
tious diseases.  The  addition  of  water  or  ice  to  milk  is 
hereby  declared  an  adulteration. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

62.  (C.  L.,  11413)  Sec.  2.  Any  person  who  shall 
violate  any  of  the  provisions  of  the  preceding  section  shall 
be  punished  by  a  fine  not  to  exceed  one  hundred  dollars 
or  (by)  imprisonment  not  to  exceed  three  months  or  by 
both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court. 

63.  (0.  L.,  11414)  Sec.  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  metropolitan  police  commissioners  of  the  city  of  De- 
troit, by  and  with  the  consent  and  advice  of  the  board 
of  health  of  the  city  of  Detroit,  to  appoint  an  inspector, 
who  shall  be  a  person  of  previous  practical  experience. 
Said  inspector  may  be  created  captain,  sergeant  or 
roundsman  of  the  said  police  force  of  the  city  of  De- 
troit, at  the  option  of  the  board  of  metropolitan  police 
commissioners. 

64.  (C.  L.,  11415)  Sec.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of 
said  inspector  to  personally  view,  so  far  as  possible,  all 
milk  exposed  for  sale  in  said  city,  and  to  visit  all  dairy 
houses,  barns  or  stables  in  said  city  or  the  county  of 
Wayne,  to  inspect  the  same,  and  the  animals  held  there- 
in, and  to  visit  all  j)laces  where  milk  is  kept  or  exposed 
for  sale  in  the  city  of  Detroit,  and  to  inspect  and  ascer- 
tain the  condition  of  said  milk.  He  may  detail  any  pa- 
trolman of  said  city  to  assist  him  in  the  performance  of 
any  or  all  of  the  duties  enjoined  on  him  by  this  act :  Pro- 
vided, always.  That  said  inspector  and  any  policeman  so 
detailed  shall  always  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of  the 
law  establishing  and  governing  the  metropolitan,  police 
of  said  city. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  35 

Go.  (C.  L.,  11416)  Sec.  5.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of 
said  inspector  or  of  his  assistant,  and  of  all  other  in- 
spectors appointed  under  this  act,  to  make  complaint  in 
writing  before  a  police  justice  or  justice  of  the  peace,  or 
other  court  having  jurisdiction  thereof,  of  every  violation 
of  this  act  coming  to  his  knowledge. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

66.  (C.  L.,  11417)  Sec.  6.  Each  and  every  quantity 
of  milk  sold  or  exposed  for  sale  contrary  to  the  provisions 
of  this  act,  shall  constitute  a  separate  offense. 

67.  (C.  L.,  11418)  Sec.  7.  Any  person  who  shall  re- 
fuse to  permit  the  said  inspector,  or  his  assistant  (as- 
sistants) to  perform  his  duty  under  this  act,  either  by 
refusing  him  entrance  to  his  premises  or  by  concealing 
any  milk,  or  refusing  to  permit  any  milk  or  animal  or 
premises  wherein  animals  are  kept,  to  be  viewed  and  in- 
spected as  herein  provided,  or  by  in  any  manner  hinder- 
ing or  resisting  any  said  inspector  or  assistant  inspector 
in  the  performance  of  his  duty,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  punished  therefor. 

68.  (C.  L.,  11419)  Sec.  8.  Authority  is  hereby  given 
the  common  council  of  any  city,  and  the  board  of  trustees 
or  council  of  any  village,  to  appoint  an  inspector  of  milk 
in  any  such  city  or  village,  and  to  fix  their  compensation, 
and  when  appointed  the  said  inspectors  of  milk  shall  have 
all  the  powers  given  by  section  four  of  this  act,  and  shall 
perform  all  the  duties  required  of  inspectors  of  milk  as 
provided  herein,  and  such  other  powers  and  duties  as  may 
be  conferred  or  imposed  by  the  ordinances  of  said  cities 
or  villages. 

69.  (C.  L.,  11420)  Sec.  9.  Whoever  shall  adulterate 
by  himself  or  by  his  servant  or  agent,  or  sell,  exchange 
or  deliver,  or  have  in  his  custody  or  possession  with  in- 
tent to  sell  or  exchange  the  same,  or  exposes  or  offers  for 
sale  or  exchange,  adulterated  milk  or  milk  to  which  water 
or  any  foreign  (substance)  substances  in  any  state  of 
fermentation  or  putrefaction,  or  from  sick  or  diseased 


36  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

COWS,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall,  for 
every  such  offense,  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding 
one  hundred  dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county 
jail  or  the  State  House  of  Correction  and  Reformatory 
at  Ionia  not  exceeding  three  months. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

70.  (C.  L.,  11421)  Sec.  10.  Whoever  shall  adulter- 
ate, himself  or  by  his  servant  or  agent,  sell,  exchange  or 
deliver,  or  have  in  his  custody  or  possession  with  intent 
to  sell  or  exchange  the  same,  or  exposes  or  offers  for  sale 
as  pure  milk,  any  skimmed  milk  from  which  the  cream  or 
any  part  thereof  has  been  removed  shall  be  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  shall  for  such  offense,  be  punished  by 
the  penalty  provided  in  the  preceding  section. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

71.  (0.  L.,  11422)  Sec.  11.  Any  dealer  in  milk  who 
shall  by  himself,  servant  or  agent,  sell,  exchange  or  de- 
liver, or  have  in  his  custody  or  possession  with  intent  to 
sell,  exchange  or  deliver  the  same,  milk  from  which  the 
cream  or  any  part  thereof  has  been  removed,  unless  in  a 
conspicuous  place  above  the  center  upon  the  outside  of 
every  vessel,  can  or  package  from  which  any  such  milk 
is  sold,  the  words  "Skimmed  milk"  are  distinctly  painted 
in  letters  not  less  than  one  inch  in  length,  shall  be  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor  and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  ex- 
ceeding one  hundred  dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  or  Detroit  House  qf  Correction  not  exceeding 
three  months. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

72.  (C.  L.,  11423)  Sec.  12.  If  milk  sold  or  offered 
for  sale  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  pure  milk,  is 
shown  upon  analysis  by  weight  to  contain  more  than 
eighty-seven  and  fifty  one-hundredths  per  centum  of 
watery  fluid,  or  to  contain  less  than  twelve  and  fifty  one- 
hundredths  of  milk  solids  per  centum,  or  less  fat  than 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  37 


three  per  centum,  or  if  the  specific  gravity  at  GO  degi-ees 
Fahrenheit  is  not  between  1  29-1000  to  1  33-1000,  it  shall 
be  deemed  to  be  adulterated.  If  milk  sold  or  offered  for 
sale  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  as  skimmed  milk  has 
a  specific  gravity  at  60  degrees  Fahrenheit  less  than  1,032 
and  greater  than  1,037,  it  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adul- 
terated. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

73.  (C.  L.,  11424)  Sec.  13.  Whenever  any  inspector 
of  milk  has  reason  to  believe  that  any  milk  found  by  him 
is  adulterated,  he  shall  take  specimens  thereof  and  test 
the  same  with  such  instrument  or  instruments  as  are 
used  for  such  purposes,  and  he  shall  make  an  analysis 
thereof,  showing  total  solids,  the  percentage  of  butter, 
the  percentage  of  water  and  the  percentage  of  ash;  and 
if  the  result  of  such  test  and  analysis  indicates  that  the 
milk  has  been  adulterated  or  deprived  of  its  cream  or  any 
part  thereof,  the  same  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of 
such  adulteration  in  a  prosecution  under  this  act. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 

74.  (C.  L.,  11425)  Sec.  14.  Any  person  who  shall 
remove  the  cream  or  any  part  thereof  from  milk  to  be 
sold  as  pure  milk  to  any  manufactory  in  which  milk  is 
used  as  a  material  in  the  process  of  production,  and  any 
person  who  shall,  in  any  manner,  adulterate  such  milk, 
either  by  the  addition  of  water  or  otherwise,  shall  be 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall,  for  every  such  of- 
fense be  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding  one  hundred 
dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  or  Detroit 
House  of  Correction  not  exceeding  ninety  days. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  219,  P.  A.  1889.] 


38  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

(Act  No.  106,  Public  Acts,  1899.) 
AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  sale  and  delivery  of  milk. 

75.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  sell,  ex- 
change or  deliver,  or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent 
to  sell,  exchange  or  deliver,  any  milk  to  which  water, 
chemicals  or  preservatives,  or  any  other  foreign  substance 
has  been  added.  The  term  milk  as  used  in  this  act  shall 
include  all  skimmed  milk,  buttermilk,  cream  and  milk  in 
its  natural  state  as  drawn  from  the  cow. 

76.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things 
prohibited,  or  neglects  or  refuses  to  do  any  of  the  acts 
or  things  enjoined  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violates  any 
of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
one  dollar  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars  and  the 
costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county 
jail  not  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and 
imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

This  act  is  ordered  to  take  immediate  effect. 


INSANITARY  MILK  AND  CREAM. 
Act  No.  222,  Session  Laws  1913. 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  and  punish  the  sale  of  unclean  and  in- 
sanitary cream  and  milk  and  the  use  thereof  in  the  manufac- 
ture of  food  products  and  to  prohibit  unclean  and  insanitary 
conditions  of  creameries,  cheese  factories,  ice  cream  fac- 
tories and  milk  dealer's  establishments  or  out-fits  and  fixing 
standards  of  sanitary  milk  and  cream,  and  to  regulate  the 
sale  and  transportation  of  the  same. 

77.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  For  the  purpose  of  this  act,  the  term  "milk"  shall 
mean  the  fresh,  clean,  lacteal  secretion  obtained  by  the 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  39 


complete  milking  of  one  or  more  healthy  cows,  properly 
fed  and  kept,  excluding  that  obtained  witliin  eight  days 
before  and  four  days  after  calving,  and  contains  not' 
less  tlian  eight  and  one-half  per  cent  of  solids  not  fat,  and 
not  less  than  three  per  cent  of  milk  fat;  and  the  term 
"cream"  shall  mean  that  portion  of  milk,  rich  in  milk 
fat,  which  rises  to  the  surface  of  milk  on  standing,  or 
is  separated  from  it  by  centrifugal  force,  is  fresh  and 
clean,  and  contains  not  less  than  eighteen  \)ev  cent  of 
milk  fat.  Milk  which  shall  bo  drawn  from  cows  that  are 
kept  in  barns  or  stables  which  are  not  reasonably  well 
lighted  and  ventilated,  or  that  are  kept  in  barns  or 
stables  that  are  filthy  from  an  accumulation  of  animal 
feces  and  excreta  or  from  any  other  cause,  or  milk  which 
shall  be  drawn  from  cows  which  are  themselves  in  a  filthy 
condition;  or  milk  kept  or  transported  in  dirty,  rusty 
or  opened-seamed  cans  or  other  utensils;  or  milk  that  is 
stale,  putrescent,  or  putrid;  or  milk  to  which  has  been 
added  any  unclean,  or  unwholesome  foreign  substance; 
or  milk  which  has  been  kept  exposed  to  foul  or  noxious 
air  or  gases  in  bams  occupied  by  animals,  or  kept  ex- 
posed in  dirty,  foul  or  unclean  places  or  conditions,  is 
hereby  declared  to  be  insanitary  milk.  Cream  produced 
from  any  such  aforesaid  insanitary  milk;  or  cream  .pro- 
duced by  the  use  of  a  cream  separator,  which  separator 
had  not  been  thoroughly  washed,  cleansed  and  scalded 
after  previous  use  in  the  separation  of  cream  from  milk ; 
or  cream  produced  by  the  use  of  a  cream  separator 
placed  or  stationed  in  an}'^  unclean  or  filthy  room  or 
})lace  or  in  any  building  containing  a  stable  wherein  are 
kept  cattle  or  other  animals,  unless  such  cream  separator 
is  so  separated  and  shielded  by  a  partition  from  the 
stable  portion  of  such  building  as  to  be  free  from  all  foul 
or  noxious  air  or  gases  which  issue  or  may  issue  from 
such  place  or  stable;  or  cream  that  is  stale,  putrescent, 
or  putrid;  or  cream  that  is  kept  or  transported  in  dirty, 
rusty  or  open-seamed  cans  or  other  utensils;  or  cream 
which  has  been  kept  exposed  to  foul  or  noxious  air  or 
gases  in  barns  occupied  by  animals,  or  in  dirty,  foul  or 


40  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


unclean  places  or  conditions,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  in- 
sanitary cream. 

78.  Sec.  2.  No  person  shall  by  himself,  his  servant  or 
agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any  other  person,  or 
as  the  officer,  servant  or  agent  of  any  firm  or  corpora- 
tion, sell  or  offer  for  sale,  furnish  or  deliver,  or  have  in 
possession  or  under  his  control  with  intent  to  sell  or 
offer  for  sale,  or  furnish,  or  deliver  to  any  person,  firm 
or  corporation  as  food  for  man,  or  to  any  creamery, 
cheese  factory,  milk  condensing  factory,  or  milk  or  cream 
dealer,  any  insanitary  milk  or  any  insanitary  cream. 

79.  Sec.  3.  No  person  shall  by  himself,  his  servant  or 
agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any  other  person,  or 
as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any  firm  or  corporation,  manu- 
facture for  sale  any  article  of  food  for  man  from  any 
insanitary  milk  or  from  any  insanitary  cream. 

80.  Sec.  4.  All  premises  and  utensils  used  in  the 
handling  of  milk,  cream,  and  by-products  of  milk,  and  all 
premises  and  utensils  used  in  the  preparation,  manu- 
facture, or  sale,  or  offering  for  sale  of  any  food  product 
for  man  from  milk  or  cream  or  the  by-products  of  milk, 
which  shall  be  kept  in  an  unclean,  filthy  or  noxious  con- 
dition are  hereby  declared  to  be  insanitary.  It  shall  be 
unlawful  for  any  person,  firm,  or  corporation  engaged 
in  selling,  or  furnishing  milk,  cream,  or  any  by-products 
of  milk,  intended  for  use  as  food  for  man;  and  it  shall 
be  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm  or  corporation  engaged 
in  selling  or  furnishing  milk,  cream,  or  any  by-products 
of  milk,  to  any  creamery,  cheese  factor^',  milk  condensing 
factory,  or  to  any  place  where  such  milk,  cream,  or  by- 
products of  milk  are  manufactured  or  prepared  into  a 
food  product  for  man,  and  for  sale  as  such;  and  it  shall 
be  unlawful  for  any  milk  dealer,  or  an  employe  of  such 
milk  dealer,  or  any  person,  firm  or  corporation,  or  the 
employ  of  such  person,  firm,  or  corporation,  who  operates 
a  creamery,  cheese  factory,  milk  condensing  factory,  or 
who  manufactures  or  prepares  for  sale  any  article  of 
food  for  man  from  milk,  cream,  or  bj'-product  of  milk,  or 
•who  manufactures,  re-works,  or  packs  butter  for  sale  as 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  41 

a  food  product,  to  maintain  his  premises  and  utensils 
in  an  insanitary  condition. 

81.  Sec.  5.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation,  not  a 
common  carrier  who  receives  from  a  common  carrier  in 
cans,  bottles  or  other  vessels  any  milk,  or  cream,  ice 
cream  or  other  dairy  product  intended  as  food  for  man, 
which  has  been  transported  over  any  railroad  or  boat 
line  or  by  other  common  carrier,  when  such  cans,  bottles 
or  vessels  are  to  be  returned,  shall  cause  the  said  cans, 
bottles,  or  other  vessels  to  be  thoroughly  washed  and 
cleansed  before  return  shipment. 

82.  Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  by  himself,  his  servant  or 
agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any  other  j>erson,  or 
as  the  officer,  servant  or  agent  of  any  firm  or  corporation, 
who  violates  any  provision  of  this  act  shall,  upon  con- 
viction thereof,  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than 
one  hundred  dollars  for  each  and  every  offense,  or  shall 
be  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  not  more  than  sixty 
days. 


CONDENSED  MILK  LAW. 

Act  ;No.  176,  Session  Laws  1913. 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  sale  of  condensed  milk,  and  to  provide 
for  the  labeling  thereof  so  as  to  prevent  fraud  and  deception. 

83.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michi- 
gan enact,  Every  container  of  evaporated,  concentrated 
or  condensed  whole  milk,  and  every  container  of  evap- 
orated, concentrated  or  condensed  skimmed  milk,  sold 
or  offered  for  sale  or  had  in  possession  or  custody 
with  intent  to  sell  by  any  person,  firm  or  corporation 
within  this  State,  shall  have  plainly  printed  thereon  in 
the  English  language,  or  attached  thereto  on  some  firmly 
affixed  tag  or  label,  a  formula  for  extending  the  said 
evaporated,   concentrated   or   condensed   milk   and   said 


42  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


evaporated,  eoucentrated  or  condensed  skimmed  milk, 
respectively,  with  water.  The  foi-miila  for  the  extension 
of  said  evaporated,  concentrated  or  condensed  whole 
milk  shall  be  such  that  the  resulting  milk  product  shall 
not  be  below  the  Michigan  standard  of  milk  solids  or  fat 
for  whole  milk,  and  shall  be  in  the  following  form:  By 
adding parts  of  water  to  one  part  of  the  con- 
tents of  this  can  a  resulting  milk  product  will  be  ob- 
tained which  will  not  be  below  the  legal  standard  for 
whole  milk.  The  formula  for  the  extension  of  said  evapor- 
ated, concentrated  or  condensed  skimmed  milk  shall  be 
such  that  the  resulting  milk  product  shall  not  be  below 
the  Michigan  standard  of  milk  solids  for  skimmed  milk, 

and  shall  be  in  the  following  form :     By  adding 

parts  of  water  to  one  part  of  the  contents  of  this  can  a 
resulting  milk  product  will  be  obtained  which  will  not  be 
below  the  legal  standard  for  skimmed  milk. 

84.  Sec.  2.  Whoever,  himself  or  by  his  servant  or 
agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any  person,  firm  or 
corporation,  sells,  exchange®  or  delivers,  or  has  in  his 
custody  or  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  exchange  or  de- 
liver any  container  of  evaporated,  concentrated  or  con- 
densed milk,  within  this  State,  not  marked  or  labeled  in 
compliance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall,  for  the 
offense,  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than  one  hun- 
dred dollars  or  by  imprisonment  for  not  less  than  three 
nor  more  than  six  months. 

85.  Sec.  3.  The  provisions  of  this  act  with  reference 
to  the  labeling  of  containers  of  condensed,  concentrated 
and  evaporated  skimmed  milk  shall  take  effect  upon  the 
first  day  of  October,  in  the  year  nineteen  hundred  thir- 
teen; the  remaining  provisions  of  this  act  shall  take 
effect  upon  the  first  day  of  January  in  the  year  nineteen 
hundred  fourteen. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  43 

OLEOMARGARINE. 

(Act  No.   63,   Public  Acts,   1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  manufacture,  display,  advertisement 
and  sale  of  oleomargarine  or  imitation  butter  and  to  prevent 
fraud  and  deception  therein  and  to  provide  penalties  for  vio- 
lations thereof,  and  to  repeal  act  number  one  hundred  forty- 
seven  of  the  Public  Acts  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-nine, 
entitled  "An  act  in  relation  to  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
oleomargarine  or  imitation  butter." 

86.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person  shall  sell,  expose  or  offer  for  sale  or  ex- 
change, or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell  or 
exchange,  any  oleomargarine  or  other  substance  made  in 
imitation  of  butter,  and  which  is  intended  to  be  used  as 
a  substitute  for  butter,  unless  each  and  every  vessel, 
package,  roll  or  parcel  of  such  substance  has  distinctly 
and  durably  printed,  stamped  or  stenciled  thereon  in 
black  letters  the  true  name  of  such  substance,  in  ordinary 
bold  faced  capital  letters,  not  less  than  five  line  i)ica  in 
size ;  and  also  the  name  and  address  of  the  manufacturer, 
in  ordinary  bold  faced  letters,  not  less  than  pica  in  size. 

87.  Sec.  2.  No  person  shall  sell,  exchange  or  deliver 
any  oleomargarine  or  other  substance  made  in  imitation 
of  butter,  and  which  is  intended  to  be  used  as  a  substitute 
for  butter,  unless  he  shall  also  deliver  to  the  purchaser  of 
each  and  every  roll,  package  or  parcel  of  such  oleo- 
margarine or  other  substance,  at  the  time  of  the  delivery 
of  the  same,  a  distinct  label,  on  which  is  plainly  and 
legibly  printed  in  black  ink  in  ordinary  bold  faced  capi- 
tal letters  not  less  than  five  line  pica  in  size,  the  true 
name  of  such  substance  and  also  the  name  and  address  of 
the  manufacturer,  in  ordinary  bold  faced  letters  not  less 
than  pica  in  size. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  116,  P.  A.  1915.] 


44  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN, 


88.  Sec.  3.  The  proprietor  or  keeper  of  any  store, 
hotel,  restaurant,  eating  saloon,  boarding  house,  or  other 
place  where  oleooniargarine  is  sold  or  furnished  to  per- 
sons paying  for  the  same,  shall  have  placed  on  the  walls 
of  every  store  or  room  where  oleomargarine  is  sold  or 
furnished  a  white  placard  on  which  is  printed  in  black 
ink,  in  plain  Roman  letters  of  not  less  than  three-  inches 
in  length,  and  not  less  than  two  inches  in  width,  the 
words  ^'Oleomargarine  sold  or  used  here,"  and  shall  at 
all  times  keep  the  same  exposed  in  such  conspicuous 
place  as  to  be  readily  seen  by  any  and  all  persons  enter- 
ing such  store,  or  other  room  or  rooms. 

89.  Sec.  4.  No  person  shall  use  in  any  way,  in  con- 
nection or  association  with  the  sale  or  exposure  for  sale 
or  advertisement  of  any  substance  designed  to  be  used 
as  a  substitute  for  butter,  the  word  '"butter,"  ''creamery," 
or  "dairy,"  or  the  name  or  representation  of  any  breed 
of  dairy  cattle,  or  any  combination  of  such  word  or 
words  and  representation,  or  any  other  words  or  symbols 
or  combination  thereof  commonly  used  in  the  sale  of 
butter. 

90.  Sec.  5.  For  the  purpose  of  this  act  the  word 
''butter"  shall  be  understood  to  mean  the  food  product 
usually  known  as  butter,  and  which  is  made  exclusively 
from  milk  or  cream,  or  both,  with  or  without  common 
salt,  and  with  or  without  additional  coloring  matter. 

91.  Sec.  6.  For  the  purpose  of  this  act  certain  manu- 
factured substances,  certain  extracts  and  certain  mix- 
tures and  compounds,  including  such  mixtures  and  com- 
pounds with  butter,  shall  be  known  and  designated  as 
^'oleomargarine,"  namely :  All  substances  heretofore 
known  as  oleomargarine,  oleo,  oleomargarine  oil,  butter- 
ine,  lardine,  suine  and  neutral;  all  mixtures  and  com- 
pounds of  oleomargarine,  oleo,  oleomargarine  oil,  butter- 
ine,  lardine,  suine  and  neutral;  all  lard  extracts  and 
tallow  extracts;  and  all  mixtures  and  compounds  of  tal- 
low, beef  fat,  suet,  lard,  lard  oil,  vegetable  oil,  butterine, 
lardine,  suine  and  neutral;  all  lard  extracts  and  tallow 
extracts;  and  all  mixtures  and  compounds  of  tallow,  beef 


DAIRY   AND   FOOD   LAWS.  45 


fat,  suet,  lard,  lard  oil,  vegetable  oil,  intestinal  fat,  and 
offal  fat,  made  in  imitation  or  semblance  of  butter,  or 
when  so  made,  calculated  or  intended  to  be  sold  or  used 
as  butter  or  for  butter. 

92.  ^ec.  7.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
ii]>on  conviction  tlieieof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not 
less  than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dol- 
lars, and  the  costs  of  ])rosecution,  or  by  imi)ris(mment  in 
the  county  jail  or  state  house  of  corection  and  reforma- 
tory at  Ionia,  for  not  less  than  six  months  nor  more  than 
three  years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court,  for  each  and  every  offense. 
All  acts  or  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  with  the  provisions 
of  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 

93.  Sec.  8.  Act  number  one  hundred  forty-seven  of 
the  Public  Acts  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-nine,  is  here- 
by repealed. 


(Act  No.  22,  Public  Acts,  1901.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
imitation  butter. 

94.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  by  himself  or  his  agents,  or  servants, 
shall  render  or  manufacture,  sell,  or  offer  for  sale,  expose 
for  sale,  or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any 
article,  product  or  compound  made  wholly  or  in  part  out 
of  an}'  fat,  oil  or  oleaginous  -substance  or  compound 
thereof,  not  produced  from  unadulterated  milk  or  cream 
from  the  same,  which  shall  be  in  imitation  of  yellow 
butter  produced  from  pure  unadulterated  milk  or  cream 
of  the  same:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be 
construed  to  prohibit  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  oleomar- 
garine in  a  separate  and  distinct  form,  and  in  such  man- 
ner as  will  advise  the  consumer  of  its  real  character,  free 


46  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

from  coloration  or  ingredient  that  causes  it  to  look  like 
butter. 

95.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of 
section  one  of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  five 
hundred  dollars,  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  State  House  of  Correc- 
tion and  Reformatory  at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  six 
months  nor  more  than  three  years,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court,  for  each 
and  every  offense. 


RENOVATED  BUTTER. 

(Act  No.  243,  Public  Acts,  1903,  as  amended.) 

AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  renovated 

butter. 

96.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  manufacture 
for  sale,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  sell,  exchange  or  deliver, 
or  have  in  his  possession  with  the  intent  to  sell,  exchange 
or  deliver,  any  butter  that  is  produced  by  taking  original 
packing  stock  butter  or  other  butter,  or  both,  melting  the 
same  so  that  the  butter  fat  can  be'drawn  off  or  extracted, 
mixing  the  said  butter  fat  with  skimmed  milk,  or  milk 
or  cream,  or  other  milk  product,  and  rechurning  or  re- 
working the  said  mixture;  nor  shall  any  person,  firm  or 
corporation  manufacture  for  sale,  offer  or  expose  for  sale, 
sell,  exchange  or  deliver,  or  have  in  his  possession  for  any 
such  purpose  any  butter  which  has  been  subjected  to  any 
process  by  which  it  is  melted,  clarified  or  refined,  and 
made  to  resemble  butter,  and  is  commonly  known  as 
boiled,  process  or  renovated  butter,  and  which  for  the 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  47 


purpose  of  this  act  is  hereby  designated  as  "Renovated 
Butter,"  unless  the  same  shall  be  branded  or  marked  as 
provided  in  section  two  of  this  act. 

97.  Sec.  2.  Whoever,  himself  or  by  his  agent  or  as  the 
servant  or  agent  of  another  person,  shall  sell,  expose  for 
sale  or  have  in  his  custody  or  possession  with  the  intent 
to  sell  any  renovated  butter  as  defined  in  section  one  of 
this  act,  shall  have  the  words  "renovated  butter''  con- 
spicuously stamped,  labeled  or  marked  in  one  or  two 
lines  and  in  plain  Gothic  letters,  at  least  three-eighths 
of  an  inch  square,  so  that  the  words  cannot  easily  be  de- 
faced, upon  two  sides  of  each  and  every  tub,  firkin,  box 
or  package  containing  said  renovated  butter;  or  if  such 
butter  is  exposed  for  sale  uncovered,  or  not  in  a  case  or 
package,  a  placard  containing  said  words  in  the  same 
form  as  above  described  in  this  section  shall  be  attached 
to  the  mass  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  easily  seen  and 
read  by  the  purchaser.  When  renovated  butter  is  sold 
from  such  packages  or  otherwise  at  retail  in  print,  roll  or 
other  form,  before  being  delivered  to  the  purchaser,  it 
shall  be  wrapped  in  wrappers  plainly  stamped  on  the 
outside  thereof  with  the  words  ''renovated  butter"  print- 
ed or  stamped  thereon  in  one  or  two  lines,  and  in  plain 
Gothic  letters  at  least  three-eighths  of  an  inch  square, 
and  such  wrappers  shall  contain  no  other  words  or  print- 
ing thereon,  and  said  words  ''renovated  butter"  so 
stamped  or  printed  on  the  said  wrapper  shall  not  be  in 
any  manner  concealed,  but  shall  be  in  plain  view  of  the 
purchaser  at  the  time  of  the  purchase.  The  proprietor  or 
keeper  of  any  hotel,  restaurant,  eating  saloon,  boarding 
house,  or  other  place  where  renovated  butter  is  furnished 
to  persons  paying  for  the  same,  shall  have  placed  on  the 
walls  of  every  store  or  room  where  renovated  butter  is 
furnished,  a  white  placard  on  which  is  printed  in  black 
ink,  in  plain  Roman  letters  of  not  less  than  three  inches 
in  length,  and  not  less  than  two  inches  in  width,  the 
words  "renovated  butter  used  here,"  and  shall  at  all 
times  keep  the  same  exposed  in  such  conspicuous  place  as 


48  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

to  be  readily  seen  by  any  and  all  persons  entering  such 
store,  hotel,  restaurant  or  other  room  or  rooms. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  119,  P.  A.  1909.    Am.  by  Act  No.  15,  P.  A.  1915.] 

98.  Sec.  3.  Whoever  shall  violate  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor 
and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine 
of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  five 
hundred  dollars,  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  Michigan  Reformatory 
-at  Ionia,  for  not  less  than  six  months  nor  more  than 
three  years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment,  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court,  for  each  and  every  offense. 

99.  Sec.  4.  Act  number  twt)  hundred  fifty-four  of  the 
public  acts  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-nine,  entitled  ''An 
act  to  regulate  the  sale  of  butter  produced  by  taking 
original  packing  stock  and  other  butter  and  melting  the 
same  so  that  the  butter  oil  can  be  drawn  off,  mixed  with 
skimmed  milk  or  other  material,  and  by  emulsion  or 
other  process  produce  butter,  and  butter  produced  by 
any  similar  process  and  commonly  known  as  "process'' 
butter;  providing  for  the  enforcement  thereof,  and  pun- 
ishment for  the  violation  of  the  same,"  is  hereby  repealed. 


BUTTER  &  CREAM    STANDARDS. 

(Act  No.   244,   Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  sale  of  butter  and  cream  in  the  State 
of  Michigan,  and  to  prescribe  a  penalty  for  the  violation  of 
this  act. 

100.-  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michi- 
gan enact,  No  person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  have 
in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  as  butter 
any  product  which  contains  less  than  eighty  per  cent 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  49 

of  milk  fat,  and  which  is  not  made  exclusively  from 
iiiilk  or  cream,  or  both,  with  or  without  common  salt  and 
with  or  without  additional  coloring  matter. 

101.  Sec.  2.  No  person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale, 
have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  as 
cream  any  product  which  contains  less  than  eighteen 
per  cent  of  milk  fat,  and  which  is  not  tliat  portion  of 
milk,  rich  in  milk  fat,  which  rises  to  the  surface  of  milk 
on  standing,  or  is  separated  from  it  by  centrifugal  force, 
and  which  is  not  clean :  Provided,  That  the  provisions  of 
this  act  shall  not  be  deemed  to  apply  to  any  person  not 
a  manufacturer  or  producer  of  butter  and  cream,  who 
has  bought  the  products  mentioned  in  this  act  for  resale, 
and  when  found  to  be  under  tlie  standard  prescribed  by 
this  act,  shall  furnish  information  from  whom  his  prod- 
ucts were  received. 

102.  Sec.  3.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited,  or  wilfully  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any 
of  the  acts  or  things  enjoined  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way 
violate  any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  where  no  specific  penalty  is  prescribed 
by  this  act  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
twenty-five  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not  more 
than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprison- 
ment in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 


Wi}aitmit  Satrg  Ijftsimtt  fexrijai 


50  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

CANDY. 

(Act  No.  207,  Public  Acts,  1911.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  the  adulteration  of  candies  and  to  regulate 
the  sale  thereof. 

103.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person  firm,  or  corporation  shall  manufacture 
for  sale,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  sell,  exchange  or  deliver, 
or  have  in  his  possession  with  the  intent  to  sell,  exchange 
or  deliver,  any  candies  or  confectioneries  adulterated  by 
the  admixture  of  terra  alba,  barytes  talc  or  other  earthy 
or  mineral  substances,  or  any  poisonous  colors,  flavors  or 
extracts,  or  other  deleterious  ingredients  detrimental  to 
health. 

104.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions 
of  section  one  of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  one 
thousand  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  or  State  House  of  Correc- 
tion and  Keformatory  at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  six 
months  nor  more  than  three  years,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court  for  each 
and  every  offense. 

105.  Sec.  3.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 
with  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  51 


PEPPER. 

(Act  No.  180,   Public  Acts,  1901.) 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  black 
pepper  in  this  State  and  to  provide  a  penalty  for  the  viola- 
tion of  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

106.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  Within  this  State  no  person,  firm  or  corporation 
shall  manufacture,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  keep  in  pos- 
session with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  any  ground  or  whole 
black  pepper  containing  any  foreign  substance  whatever. 
All  black  pepper  shall  contain  not  more  than  six  and  one- 
half  per  cent  ash  or  mineral  matter;  and  shall  contain 
not  less  than  twenty-five  per  cent  starch  as  determined  by 
the  diastase  method ;  and  shall  contain  not  less  than  six- 
tenths  of  one  per  cent  nor  more  than  one  and  three- 
fcurths  per  cent  volatile  ether  extract;  and  shall  con- 
tain not  more  than  ten  per  cent  nor  less  than  six  and 
one-half  per  cent  of  non-volatile  ether  extract;  and  shall 
contain  not  more  than  sixteen  per  cent  of  crude  fibre. 

107.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited,  or  neglects  or  refuses  to  do  any  of  the 
acts  or  things  enjoined  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  vio- 
lates any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  less 
than  twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dol- 
lars and  the  costs  of  the  prosecution,  or  by  imprison- 
ment in  the  county  jail  not  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by 
both  such  fine  and  imprisonment,  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court. 


52  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

CORN  SYRUP. 

(Act  No.   123,   Public  Acts,   1903.) 

AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  sale  of  corn  syrup. 

108.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  have  in  his 
possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell,  any  cane  syrup, 
beet  syrup,  or  glucose,  unless  the  barrel,  cask,  keg,  can, 
pail  or  package  containing  the  same  be  distinctly  branded 
or  labeled  with  the  true  and  appropriate  name;  nor 
shall  any  person  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  have  in  his 
possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  any  cane  syrup  or 
beet  syrup  mixed  with  glucose  unless  the  barrel,  cask, 
keg,  can,  pail  or  package  containing  the  same  be  dis- 
tinctly branded  or  labeled  ''Glucose  Mixture"  or  ''Corn 
S^rup,"  in  plain  gothic  type  not  less  than  three-eighths  of 
an  inch  square,  with  the  name  and  percentage  by  weight 
of  each  ingredient  contained  therein  plainly  stamped, 
branded  or  stenciled  on  each  package  in  plain  Gothic 
letters  not  less  than  one-quarter  of  an  inch  square.  Each 
and  every  package  of  syrup  either  simple  or  mixed  shall 
bear  the  name  and  address  of  the  manufacturer.  Such 
mixtures  or  syrups  shall  have  no  other  designation  or 
brand  than  herein  required  that  represents  or  is  the  name 
of  any  article  which  contains  a  saccharine  substance; 
and  all  brands  or  labels  required  shall  be  an  inseparable 
part  of  the  general  or  distinguishing  label,  and  that  the 
general  or  distinguishing  label  shall  be  that  principal 
and  conspicuous  sign  under  which  it  is  sold. 

109.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited,  or  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any  of  the 
acts  or  things  required  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violate 
any  of  the  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  less  than 
twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS.  53 

by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not 
less  than  thir.ty  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both 
such    fine    and   imprisonment    in    the   discretion   of    the 
court. 
This  act  is  ordered  to  talce  immediate  effect. 


PRESERVATIVES. 

(Act  No.  7,  Public  Acts,  1905.) 
AN  ACT  in  relation  to  the  use  of  preservatives  in  food  products. 

110.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  manufacture, 
sell,  ofl'er  for  sale,  expose  for  sale,  or  have  in  his  posses- 
sion with  intent  to  sell,  any  food  product  containing  ben- 
zoic acid  or  benzoate  of  sodium,  or  any  other  harmless 
preservative,  unless  each  and  every  package  containing 
the  same  shall,  in  the  condition  in  which  it  is  exposed  for 
sale,  be  distinctly,  conspicuously,  and  legibly  branded, 
labeled  or  marked,  in  plain  English  letters,  with  the 
words  "Prepared  with"  followed  by  the  proper  English 
name  of  the  preservative  used:  Provided,  That  nothing 
in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  or  regulate,  by 
branding  or  otherwise,  the  use  as  a  preservative  of  com- 
mon salt,  syrup,  sugar,  salt  petre,  spices,  alcohol,  vinegar, 
or  wood  smoke:  And  provided  Further,  That  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act  shall  not  apply  to  dairy  products. 

111.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited,  or  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any  of  the 
acts  or  things  required  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violate 
any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  less  than 
ten  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not  more 


54  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

than  ninety  days,   or   by  both  such  fine  and  imprison- 
ment in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

This  act  is  ordered  to  take  immediate  effect. 


MAPLE  SUGAR  AND  SYRUP. 

(Act  No.  170,  Public  Acts,  1893.) 

AN  ACT   to   prohibit   the   adulteration   of  maple   sugar,   maple 
molasses  and  maple  syrup. 

112.  (5007)  Section  1.  Th€  People  of  the  State  of 
Michigan  enact,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person, 
dealer,  firm,  manufacturer  or  corporation  to  manufacture 
and  sell,  or  offer  for  sale,  any  maple  sugar,  maple  mo- 
lasses or  maple  syrup  that  is  in  anywise  adulterated  with 
common  sugar,  beet  sugar,  glucose  or  any  other  foreign 
substance  without  distinctly  marking,  stamping  or  label- 
ing the  article  or  the  package  containing  the  same  with 
the  true  and  appropriate  name  of  such  article  and  the 
percentage  in  which  common  sugar,  beet  sugar,  glucose 
or  any  other  foreign  substance  enters  into  the  compo- 
sition of  the  same. 

113.  (5008)  Sec.  2.  Any  person,  dealer,  firm,  manu- 
facturer or  corporation  who  shall  sell  or  offer  for  sale, 
and  who  shall  falsely  stamp  or  misrepresent  or  label  any 
cans,  jugs,  jars,  or  packages  containing  maple  molasses 
or  maple  syrup,  and  any  person,  dealer,  firm,  manufac- 
turer or  corporation  who  shall  sell  or  offer  for  sale  any 
maple  sugar  that  is  in  anywise  adulterated,  who  falsely 
misrepresents  or  labels  or  stamps  the  same,  or  knowingly 
permits  such  misrepresentation  or  false  stamping  or 
labeling,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and 
punished  with  a  fine  not  less  than  fifty  dollars,  in  case  of 
vender,  and  in  the  case  of  manufacturers  and  those 
falsely  or  fraudulently  stamping  or  labeling  or  misrepre- 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  55 

renting  such  goods,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  five  hun- 
dred dollars,  nor  more  than  one  thousand  dollars,  and  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  any  board  of  health  in  this  State, 
or  food  commissioner,  should  there  be  one,  cognizant  of 
any  violation  of  this  act  to  prosecute  any  person,  dealer, 
firm,  manufacturer,  or  corporation,  which  it  has  reason 
to  believe  has  violated  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act, 
and  after  deducting  the  costs  of  trial  and  conviction  the 
balance  of  fine  recovered,  one-half  be  placed  in  the  town- 
ship treasury  wherein  the  conviction  is  made,  the  balance 
placed  to  the  general  fund  of  the  county.  Any  (person) 
persons,  dealer,  firm,  manufacturer  or  corporation  who 
shall  knowingly  sell  or  offer  for  sale  any  cans,  jugs,  jars, 
or  packages  containing  maple  molasses,  maple  syrup,  or 
maple  sugar,  that  is  in  anywise  adulterated,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  punished  by  a  fine 
of  not  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprison- 
ment in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  not  to  exceed  three 
months,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment,  at  the 
discretion  of  the  court. 

114.  (5009)  Sec.  3.  Any  person,  dealer,  firm,  manu- 
facturer, or  corporation,  who  shall  falsely  stamp  or  mis- 
represent or  label  any  cans,  jugs,  jars,  or  packages,  con- 
taining maple  molasses,  or  maple  syrup,  or  maple  sugar, 
that  is  in  anywise  adulterated,  or  knowingly  permits 
such  (misrepresentation)  misrepresentations  or  false 
stamping  or  labeling,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  punished  by  a  fine,  not  more  than  five  hun- 
dred dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a 
period  of  not  more  than  one  year,  or  by  both  such  fine  or 
imprisonment,  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 


56  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


ICE  CREAM. 

(Act  No.  70,  Public  Acts,  1909.) 

AN  ACT   to   regulate   the  manufacture   and   sale   of  ice   cream 
within  the  limits  of  the  State  of  Michigan. 

115.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  manufacture 
for  sale,  keep  for  sale,  sell,  barter,  exchange  or  deal  in 
ice  cream  which  shall  contain  any  substance  other  than 
milk,  cream,  eggs,  sugar,  and  some  neutral  flavoring 
gelatin  or  vegetable  gums  or  which  contain  other  than  the 
required  amount  of  milk  fat  as  hereinafter  provided. 

116.  Sec.  2.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall 
manufacture  for  sale,  keep  for  sale,  sell,  barter,  or  deal 
in  ice  cream  adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  this  act. 

117.  Sec.  8.  Ice  cream  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulter- 
ated within  the  meaning  of  this  act: 

First,  If  it  shall  contain  boric  acid,  formaldehyde, 
saccharin,  or  any  other  added  substance  or  compound 
that  is  deleterious  to  health; 

Second,  If  it  shall  contain  salts  of  copper,  iron  oxide, 
ocres  or  any  coloring  substance  deleterious  to  health : 
Provided,  That  this  paragraph  shall  not  be  construed  to 
prohibit  the  use  of  harmless  coloring  matter  in  ice  cream 
when  not  used  for  fraudulent  purposes; 

Third,  If  it  shall  contain  any  deleterious  flavoring 
matter,  or  flavoring  matter  not  true  to  name; 

Fourth,  If  it  be  an  imitation  of,  or  offered  for  sale 
under  the  name  of  another  article; 

Fifth,  If  it  contains  less  than  ten  per  centum  milk  fat, 
except  where  fruit  or  nuts  are  used  for  the  purpose  of 
flavoring  when  it  shall  not  contain  less  than  eight  per 
centum  milk  fat.  Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed 
to  prohibit  the  use  of  not  to  exceed  seven-tenths  of  one 


DAIRY   AND    POOD    LAWS.  57 

j)ei'  centum   of   pure  jjelatin,   gjum   trajjacanth   or  other 
vejjetable  gums. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  224,  P.  A.  1913.] 

118.  Sec.  4.  The  standard  of  ice  cream  in  this  state 
and  for  the  purpose  of  this  act  is  hereby  declared  to  be 
a  frozen  product  made  from  milk,  cream,  eggs  and  sugar 
with  or  without  a  natural  flavoring  and  the  gums  men- 
tioned in  the  preceding  section  and  contains  not  less  than 
ten  per  cent  of  milk  fat.  Fruit  ice  cream  is  a  frozen 
product  made  from  milk,  cream,  eggs  and  sugar  and 
sound,  clean,  mature  fruits,  and  contains  not  less  than 
eight  per  cent  of  milk  fat.  Nut  ice  cream  is  a  frozen 
product  made  from  milk,  cream,  eggs,  sugar  and  sound, 
non-rancid  nuts,  and  contains  not  less  than  eight  per 
cent  of  milk  fat. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  224,  P.  A.  1913.] 

119.  Sec.  5.  It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  person, 
firm  or  corporation  to  sell,  offer  for  sale,  expose  for  sale, 
or  have  in  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any  ice  cream  in 
any  container  which  is  falsely  labeled  or  branded  as  to 
the  name  of  the  manufacturer  thereof  or  to  misrepresent 
in  any  way  the  place  of  manufacture  of  ice  cream  or  the 
manufacturer  thereof. 

120.  Sec.  6.  Each  person,  firm  or  corporation  engaged 
in  the  manufacture  of  ice  cream  as  a  business  within  this 
State,  after  this  act  shall  take  etfect,  shall  file  with  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  an  application  for  a  li- 
cense accompanied  with  a  fee  of  five  dollars,  and  upon 
receipt  of  such  application  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner shall  issue  to  the  person,  firm  or  corporation  mak- 
ing such  application  a  license  to  manufacture  ice  cream, 
as  provided  in  this  act,  which  license  shall  run  for  one 
3'ear  from  the  date  of  the  application,  and  shall  be  re- 
newed annually  thereafter. 

The  money  so  collected  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Com- 
missioner shall  be  paid  into  the  State  treasury  and  be 


58  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

used  to  help  defray  the  expenses  of  the  office  of  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  in  addition  to  the  annual  appro- 
priation therefor:  Provided,  That  this  section  shall  not 
apply  except  in  cities  of  more  than  three  thousand  in- 
habitants, by  the  last  United  States  census,  to  any  per- 
son, firm  or  corporation  manufacturing  and  selling  ice 
cream  by  the  dish  direct  to  the  consumer. 

121.  Sec.  7.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  who 
shall  violate  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  upon  conviction 
shall  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  nor  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  for  not  less  than  thirty  days  nor  more  than 
ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court. 

122.  Sec.  8.  The  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner 
shall  be  charged  with  the  enforcement  of  the  provisions 
of  this  act.    This  act  is  ordered  to  take  immediate  effect. 


MILL  PRODUCTS. 

(Act  No.  208,  Public  Acts,  1909.) 

AN  ACT  to  establish  uniform  weights  and  measures  of  the 
various  products  of  cereals  in  barrels  or  the  fractional  parts 
thereof  when  packed  for  sale  or  exposed  for  sale  to  firms 
or  persons  within  this  state,  and  to  provide  for  the  marking 
of  the  weight  on  packages  of  the  products  of  such  cereals. 

123.  Section  1.  The  People  of  tJie  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  When  mill  products  of  wheat,  corn,  rye  or  buck- 
wheat, known  as  flour,  grits,  meal  or  compounds  of  the 
same  are  placed  or  packed  in  barrels,  fractional  parts 
of  a  barrel  or  sacks  to  be  sold  or  billed  to  any  person 
or  persons  within  this  State,  the  standard  weight  or 
measure  of  a  barrel  or  the  fractional  part  thereof  shall 
be  as  follows,  viz: 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  59 


One  hundred  ninety-six  pounds  for  a  barrel ; 

Ninety-eight  pounds  for  one-half  barrel ; 

Forty-nine  pounds  for  one-quarter  barrel; 

Twenty-four  and  one-half  pounds  for  one-eighth 
barrel ; 

Twelve  and  one-fourth  pounds  for  one-sixteenth  barrel ; 

Six  and  one-eighth  pounds  for  one  thirty-second  barrel. 

The  full  and  correct  weights  as  herein  established  shall 
be  placed  in  said  barrel  or  fractional  part  thereof  by  the 
manufacturer,  company,  dealer,  person  or  persons  filling 
the  same,  and  the  weights  as  herein  established  shall  be 
the  legal  weights  in  this  State  for  such  packages  when 
they  are  bought  or  sold,  offered  or  exposed  for  sale,  or  in 
possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sold  and  delivered,  or- 
dered or  billed. 

124.  Sec.  2.  No  person  or  persons  shall  sell,  offer  or 
expose  for  sale  in  this  State  by  the  barrel,  or  by  the  frac- 
tional parts  of  a  barrel  as  herein  established,  any  of  the 
mill  products  specified  in  section  one  hereof,  unless  the 
barrel  or  fractional  part  of  such  barrel  shall  contain  the 
full  weight  of  such  mill  product  as  is  provided  for  in 
section  one  hereof. 

125.  Sec.  3.  Before  any  package  containing  the  mill 
products  or  compounds  of  such  mill  products  specified 
in  section  one  of  this  act  shall  be  sold  or  offered  or  ex- 
posed for  sale  in  this  State,  the  number  of  pounds  con- 
tained therein  shall  be  plainly  printed  or  stamped  on  the 
face  label  in  plain  English  letters  and  numbers  not  less 
than  one-half  inch  high.  When  such  packages  are  sold 
as  one-half,  one-quarter,  one-eighth,  one-sixteenth  or  one- 
thirty-second  of  a  barrel  they  shall  be  so  marked  in  ad- 
dition to  the  number  of  pounds  marked  thereon  as  herein 
provided. 

126.  Sec.  4.  No  manufacturer,  company,  dealer  or 
person  shall  abstract  any  part  of  the  mill  products  from 
the  standard  package  or  fractional  parts  named  in  sec- 
tion one,  and  sell  such  package  as  a  barrel  or  fractional 
part  of  a  barrel  as  defined  in  section  one. 

127.  Sec.  5.    Any  manufacturer,  company,  dealer,  per- 


60  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

son  or  persons  who  shall  knowingly  sell,  offer  or  expose 
for  sale  or  for  distribution  in  this  State  any  package 
containing  mill  products  of  the  cereals  enumerated  in 
section  one  which  are  stamped  or  labelled  with  a  greater 
number  of  pounds  than  such  package  actually  contains, 
or  who  shall  put  up  or  sell  in  this  State  any  of  the  mill 
products  of  the  above  named  cereals  in  a  manner  con- 
trary to  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be 
punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars 
nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars  and  the  costs  of 
prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  or  the 
Michigan  Reformatory  at  Ionia  for  not  less  than  ninety 
days  nor  more  than  one  year  or  by  both  such  fine  and  im- 
prisonment in  the  discretion  of  the  court  for  each  and 
every  offense:  Provided,  however,  That  nothing  in  this 
act  shall  be  construed  to  cover  or  affect  sales  or  ship- 
ments made  to  any  manufacturer,  company,  dealer,  per- 
son or  persons  outside  of  this  State  and  not  intended  for 
sale  or  shipment  back  into  this  State. 

128.  Sec.  6.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  to  investigate  all  complaints  of  vio- 
lations of  this  act,  and  to  take  all  steps  necessary  to  its 
enforcement.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  prosecuting  offi- 
cers of  this  State  to  prosecute  to  completion  all  suits 
brought  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  upon  complaint 
of  said  commissioner  or  any  person. 

129.  Sec.  7.  This  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  opera- 
tive from  and  after  January  first,  nineteen  hundred  ten. 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS.  61 

LINSEED  OR  FLAXSEED  OIL. 

(Act  No.  110,  Public  Acts,  1909.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  the  adulteration  of  linseed  oil  or  flaxseed 
oil  and  to  prevent  fraud  in  the  sale  thereof  and  in  the  sale 
of  compounds  thereof,  and  to  repeal  all  acts  in  conflict  here- 
with. 

130.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  Stute  of  Michif/an 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation,  by  himself,  his 
servant,  or  his  agent,  or  as  the  servant  or  agent  of  any 
other  person,  firm  or  corporation,  shall  manufacture  or 
mix  for  sale,  sell,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  or  have  in  his 
possession  with  intent  to  sell  in  this  State,  under  the 
name  of  raw  linseed  oil  or  raw  flaxseed  oil,  any  substance 
which  is  not  wholly  the  product  obtained  from  well 
cleaned  flaxseed  or  linseed,  and  unless  the  aforesaid  oil 
also  fulfills  the  requirements  of  the  nineteen  hundred 
edition  of  the  Pharmacopoeia  of  the  United  States,  which 
follows : 

1.  Specific  gravity  0.925  to  0.985  at  25  deg.  C.  (77 
deg.  F.)  It  does  not  congeal  at  temperatures  above  20 
deg.  C  ( — 4  deg.  F.).  It  is  soluble  in  about  ten  parts  of 
absolute  alcohol  and  in  all  proportions  in  ether,  chloro- 
form, petroleum,  benzine,  carbon  disulphide  and  oil  of 
turpentine.  It  should  not  more  than  slightly  redden  blue 
litmus  paper,  previously  moistened  with  alcohol  (limit 
of  free  acid).  The  oil  should  be  completely  saponifiable 
with  alcoholic  i>otassium  hydroxide  T.  S.  and  the  result- 
ing soap  should  be  completely  soluble  in  water  without 
leaving  an  oily  residue,  (absence  of  mineral  oils  and 
rosin  oils).  If  2  CC.  of  the  oil  be  warmed  and  shaken  in 
a  test  tube  with  an  equal  volume  of  glacial  acetic  acid, 
and  if  to  this  mixture,  after  cooling,  one  drop  of  sul- 
phuric acid  be  added,  a  greenish  color  should  be  pro- 
duced. (A  violet  color  under  these  circumstances  indi- 
cates the  presence  of  rosin  oils).    Linseed  oil  saponified 


62  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

by  alcoholic  potassium  hydroxide  T.  S.  should  show  a 
saponification  value  of  from  187  to  195.  If  0.15  CC.  of 
linseed  oil  be  dissolved  in  10  CC.  of  chloroform  in  a  250 
CC.  flask  at  25  CC.  of  a  mixture  of  equal  volume  of  alco- 
holic iodine  T.  S.  and  alcoholic  mercuric  chloride  T.  S. 
added,  and  if,  after  standing  for  sixteen  hours,  protected 
from  the  light,  20  CC.  potassium  iodide  T.  S.  be  intro- 
duced and  the  mixture  diluted  with  50  CC.  of  water,  on 
titrating  the  excess  of  iodine  with  tenth  normal  sodium 
thiosulphate  V.  S.  an  iodine  value  of  not  less  than  170 
should  be  obtained.  No  ^person,  firm  or  corporation,  by 
himeslf,  his  servant  or  his  agent,  or  as  the  servant  or 
agent  of  any  other  person,  firm  or  corporation,  shall  man- 
ufacture or  mix  for  sale,  sell,  offer  or  expose  for  sale 
or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell  in  this  State, 
any  substance  as  boiled  linseed  oil  or  as  boiled  flaxseed 
oil,  unless  the  same  shall  have  been  prepared  by  heating 
raw  linseed  oil,  as  defined  above:  Provided,  That  if  drier 
is  used  in  said  boiled  linseed  oil  or  boiled  flaxseed  oil, 
the  same  shall  have  been  prepared  by  incorporating  said 
drier  with  raw  linseed  oil,  as  defined  above,  at  a  tem- 
perature of  not  less  than  225  deg.  Fahrenheit,  and  fur- 
thermore contains  not  less  than  96  per  cent  of  linseed 
oil;  and  for  the  purpose  of  this  act  it  shall  also  be 
deemed  a  violation  thereof  if  said  boiled  linseed  oil  pre- 
pared either  with  or  without  drier  does  not  conform  to 
the  following  requirements:  1.  Its  specific  gravity  at  60 
deg.  Fahrenheit  must  be  not  less  than  0.935  and  not 
greater  than  0.945;  2.  Its  saponification  value  (Koetts- 
torfer  figure)  must  not  be  less  than  186;  3.  Its  iodine 
number  (Huebl's  method)  must  be  not  less  than  160;  4. 
Its  acid  value  must  not  exceed  10 ;  5.  The  volatile  matter 
expelled  at  212  deg.  Fahrenheit  must  not  exceed  one- 
half  of  one  per  cent;  6.  No  mineral  oil  shall  be  present 
and  the  amount  of  unsaponifiable  matter  as  deter- 
mined by  standard  methods  shall  not  exceed  2.5  per 
cent;  7.  The  film  left  after  flowing  the  oil  over  glass 
and  allowing  it  to  drain  in  a  vertical  or  nearly  vertical 
position  must  dry  free  from  tackiness  in  not  to  exceed 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  63 

twenty  hours,  at  a  temperature  of  about  70  deg.  Fahren- 
heit. Linseed  oil  or  flaxseed  oil  which  does  not  conform 
to  the  foregoing  requirements  shall  be  deemed  to  be 
adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  this  act. 

131.  Sec.  2.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation,  either  by 
himself  or  another,  shall  sell,  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  or 
have  in  his  ])OSsession  with  intent  to  sell  in  tliis  State 
any  linseed  oil  or  flaxseed  oil,  except  under  its  true  name, 
and  unless  each  barrel,  keg  or  can  of  such  oil  has  plainly 
and  durably  painted,  stamped,  stenciled,  labeled  or 
marked  thereon  the  true  name  of  such  oil  in  ordinary 
bold-faced  capital  letters,  not  less  than  five  lines  pica  in 
size,  together  with  the  name  and  address  of  the  manu- 
facturer, jobber  or  dealer:  Provided,  That  if  the  con- 
tents of  the  package  be  less  than  twenty-five  gallons,  the 
type  shall  not  be  less  than  two  lines  pica  in  size.  Proof 
that  any  person,  firm  or  corporation  has  or  had  posses- 
sion of  any  oil  or  compound  which  is  adulterated  or  mis- 
branded  within  the  meaning  of  this  act  shall  be  prima 
facie  evidence  that  the  possession  thereof  is  in  violation 
of  this  act. 

132.  Sec.  3.  Linseed  oil  compounds  or  flaxseed  oil 
compounds  designed  to  take  the  place  of  raw  or  boiled 
linseed  oil  or  raw  or  boiled  flaxseed  oil  as  defined  in  sec- 
tion one  of  this  act,  whether  sold,  offered  or  exposed  for 
sale  under  invented  proprietary  names  or  titles  or  not, 
shall  bear  conspicuously  upon  the  containing  vessel,  in 
capital  letters  not  less  than  five  line  pica  in  size,  the 
word  "Compound,"  followed  immediately  with  the  true 
distinctive  names  of  the  actual  ingredients  in  the  order 
of  their  greater  preponderance,  in  the  English  language, 
in  plain  legible  type  of  the  same  size,  not  less  than  two 
lines  pica  in  size,  in  continuous  list  with  no  intervening 
matter  of  any  kind,  and  shall  also  bear  the  name  and 
address  of  the  manufacturer,  jobber  or  dealer.  Any  oil 
or  compounds  required  to  be  branded  by  the  provisions 
of  this  act  and  not  complying  with  sections  two  and 
three  shall  be  deemed  to  be  misbranded  within  the  mean- 
ing of  this  act. 


64  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

133.  Sec.  4.  It  is  hereby  made  a  duty  of  the  State 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  to  enforce  the  provisions 
of  this  act. 

134.  Sec.  5.  The  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner, his  agents,  assistants,  inspectors,  chemists  or 
others  appointed  by  him,  shall  have  fnll  rights  of  ingress 
and  egress  to  the  premises  occupied  by  parties  who 
manufacture,  sell  or  deal  in  linseed  oil  or  flaxseed  oil,  or 
linseed  oil  compounds  or  flaxseed  oil  compounds,  and 
also  shall  have  power  and  authority  to  open  any  tank, 
barrel,  can  or  other  vessel  believed  to  contain  such  oil 
and  inspect  the  contents  thereof  and  to  take  therefrom 
samples  for  analysis.  In  case  any  sample  so  taken  shall 
prove  on  analysis  to  be  adulterated  or  misbranded  in  vio- 
lation of  the  provisions  of  this  act  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  to  proceed 
against  the  offender  as  herein  provided.  No  person  shall 
obstruct  the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  ar  any 
of  his  assistants  by  refusing  entrance  to  any  place  which 
he  desires  to  enter  in  the  discharge  of  his  official  duty  as 
provided  in  this  act,  nor  shall  any  person  refuse  to  de- 
liver to  him  a  sample  of  oil  when  same  is  requested  and 
when  the  value  thereof  is  tendered. 

135.  Sec.  6.  Anj  person,  firm  or  corporation  con- 
victed of  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  the  foregoing 
act  shall,  for  the  first  offense  be  punished  by  a  fine  in 
any  sum  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  and  not  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  not  exceeding  thirty  days,  or  by  both  such 
fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court;  and 
for  the  second  and  each  subsequent  offense  by  a  fine  of 
not  less  than  fifty  dollars  and  not  more  than  two  hun- 
dred dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not 
exceeding  one  year,  or  both  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court;  or  the  fine  above  may  be  sued  for  and  recovered 
before  any  justice  of  the  peace  or  any  court  of  competent 
jurisdiction,  in  the  county  where  the  offense  shall  have 
been  committed,  at  the  instance  of  the  State  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  or  any  other  person  in  the  name  of 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  65 

the  people  of  the  State  of  Michigan  as  plaintiff  and  shall 
be  recovered  in  an  action  of  debt. 

136.     Sec.  7.     All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 
with  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 


DRUGS. 

(Act  No.   146,   Public  Acts,   1909.) 

AN  ACT  to  prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration,  misbranding, 
fraud  and  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  drugs  and 
drug  products  in  the  State  of  Michigan,  and  to  provide  for 
the  enforcement  thereof.  "* 

137.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
ctiact,  No  person  shall  within  this  State  manufacture  for 
sale,  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  fo  sell,  offer  or 
expose  for  sale,  or  sell,  any  drug  or  drug  product  which 
is  adulterated  or  misbranded  within  the  meaning  of  this 
act. 

138.  Sec.  2.  The  term  "drug"  as  used  in  this  act  shall 
include  all  medicines  and  preparations  recognized  in 
the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  or  National  Formulary 
for  internal  or  external  use,  and  any  substance  or  mix- 
ture of  substances  or  device  intended  to  be  used  for  the 
cure,  mitigation  or  prevention  of  disease  of  either  man 
or  other  animals. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  152,  P.  A.  1915.] 

130.  Sec.  3.  An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adul- 
terated within  the  meaning  of  this  act: 

First,  If,  when  it  is  sold  under  or  by  a  name  recognized 
in  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  or  National  Formu- 
lary, it  differs  from  the  standard  of  strength,  quality  or 
purity  as  determined  by  the  test  laid  down  in  the  United 
9  "^ 


66  STATE    OF*  MICHIGAN. 

States  Pharmacopoeia  or  National  Formulary  official  at 
the  time  of  investigation :  Provided,  That  no  drug  defined 
in  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  or  National  Formu- 
lary shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated  under  this  provi- 
sion if  the  standard  of  strength,  quality  or  purity  be 
plainly  stated  upon  the  principal  label  of  the  bottle,  box 
or  other  container  thereof,  although  the  standard  may 
differ  from  that  determiDcd  by  the  test  laid  down  in  the 
United  States  Pharmacopoeia  or  National  Formulary; 

Second,  If  the  strength  or  purity  fall  below  the  pro- 
fessed standard  or  quality  under  which  it  is  sold. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  152,  P.  A.  1915.] 

140.  Sec.  4.  An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  mis- 
branded  within  the  meaning  of  the  act : 

First,  If  it  is  an  imitation  of,  or  offered  for  sale  under 
the  name  of  another  article; 

Second,  If  t;he  contents  of  the  package  as  originally 
put  up  shall  have  been  removed  in  whole  or  in  part,  and 
other  contents  shall  have  been  placed  in  such  package, 
or  if  the  package  fail  to  bear  a  statement  on  the  label  of 
the  quantity  or  proportion  of  any  alcohol,  antipyrin, 
opium,  morphine,  codeine,  heroin,  cocaine,  alpha  or  beta 
eucaine,  chloroform,  cannabis  indica,  chloral  hydrate  or 
acetanilide,  or  any  derivative  or  preparation  of  any  such 
substances,  contained  therein:  Provided,  That  nothing 
herein  shall  be  construed  to  apply  to  the  dispensing  of 
prescriptions  written  by  regularly  licensed  practicing 
physicians,  veterinary  surgeons  and  dentists,  and  kept 
on  file  by  the  dispensing  pharmacist,  nor  to  such  drugs 
as  are  recognized  in  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  and 
National  Formulary,  and  which  are  sold  under  the  name 
by  which  they  are  so  recognized; 

Third,  If  the  package  containing  it  or  its  label  shall 
bear  any  statement,  design  or  device  regarding  the  in- 
gredients, or  the  substances  ^.contained  therein,  which 
statement,  design  or  device  shall  be  false  or  misleading 
in   any   particular,   and   to    any   drug  or   drug  product 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS/  67 


which  is  falsely  branded  as,  to  the  state,  territory  or 
country  in  which  it  is  manufactured  or  produced; 

Fourth,  If  its  package  or  label  shall  bear  or  contain 
any  statement,  design  or  device  regarding  the  curative 
or  therapeutic  effect  of  such  articles  or  any  of  the  in- 
gredients or  substances  contained  therein,  which  is  false 
and  fraudulent. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  152,  P.  A.  1915.] 

141.  Sec.  5.  The  president  of  the  board  of  pharmacy, 
the  president  of  the  State  Board  of  Health  and  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  shall  jointly  make  such  rules 
and  regulations  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  enforcement 
of  this  act. 

142.  Sec.  6.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  to  investigate  all  complaints  of  vio- 
lations of  this  act  and  take  all  steps  necessary  to  its  en- 
forcement; and  to  this  end  he  shall  appoint  two  drug 
inspectors  who  shall  be  registered  pharmacists,  and  one 
competent  analyst  which  inspectors  and  analyst  shall 
hold  office  at  the  pleasure  of  said  commissioner,  and 
until  others  are  appointed ;  and  the  said  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner  or  his  deputy  and  the  said  drug  inspectors 
or  any  of  them  shall  in  a  lawful  manner  inquire  into  the 
drug  products  which  are  manufactured  or  sold  or  ex- 
posed or  offered  for  sale  in  this  State,  and  may  in  a  law- 
ful manner  procure  samples  of  the  same  for  analysis; 
and  the  said  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  his  deputy, 
or  said  drug  inspectors  or  any  of  them,  shall  have  power 
to  enter  into  any  factory,  store,  salesroom,  drug  store  or 
laboratory  or  place  where  he  has  reason  to  believe  drug 
products  are  made,  stored,  sold  or  offered  for  sale,  and 
open  any  cask,  jar,  bottle  or  package  containing,  or  sup- 
posed to  contain  any  drug  product,  and  take  therefrom 
samples  for  analysis.  The  person  making  such  inspec- 
tion shall  ta^e  such  sample  of  such  article  or  product 
in  the  presence  of  at  least  one  witness,  and  he  shall,  in 
the  presence  of  said  witness  mark  or  seal  such  sample 


68  '    STATE    OP    MICHIGAN. 

and  shall  tender  at  the  time  of  taking  to  the  manufac- 
turer or  vendor  of  such  product  or  to  the  person  having 
the  custody  of  the  same  the  value  thereof  and  a  state- 
ment in  writing  for  the  taking  of  such  sample.  The 
said  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  shall  direct  said 
analyst  to  make  due  and  careful  examination  of  such 
sample  and  report  to  him  the  result  of  such  analysis 
and  if  the  same  is  found  to  be  adulterated  or  misbranded 
within  the  provisions  of  this  act  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
said  commissioner  his  deputy  or  any  drug  inspector 
assigned  to  such  duty  to  make  complaint  against  the 
manufacturer  or  vendor  thereof  in  the  proper  county  and 
furnish  all  evidence  thereof  to  obtain  a  conviction  of 
the  offense  charged,  and  in  no  case  shall  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  or  drug  inspector  making  such  com- 
plaint be  required  to  furnish  security  for  costs  in  any 
action  instituted  by  him  having  for  its  object  the  en- 
forcement of  this  act:  Provided,  Nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  held  to  prohibit  or  prevent  other  inspec- 
tors or  chemists  connected  with  the  office  of  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  from  performing  any  of  the 
duties  herein  imposed  upon  the  said  drug  inspectors  and 
analyst,  whenever  in  the  opinion  of  said  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner  the  work  of  his  office  can  be  expedited 
thereby. 

143.  Sec.  7.  In  construing  and  enforcing  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act,  the  act,  omission  or  failure  of  any  offi- 
cer, agent  or  other  person  acting  for  or  employed  by  any 
corporation,  company,  society  or  association  within  the 
scope  of  his  employment  or  office,  shall,  in  every  case,  be 
also  deemed  to  be  the  act  omission  or  failure  of  such 
corporation,  company,  society  or  association,  as  well  as 
that  of  the  person:  Provided,  That  no  dealer  shall  be 
prosecuted  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  when  he  can 
establish  a  guaranty  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
of.  the  national  food  and  drug  act,  June  thirtieth,  nine- 
teen hundred  six,  or  a  guaranty  signed  by  the  wholesaler, 
jobber,  manufacturer  or  other  parties  i^esiding  in  this 
State,  from  whom  he  purchased  such  article,  to  the  effect 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  69 


that  the  same  is  not  adulterated  nor  misbranded  within 
the  iiioanin^  of  tliis  act.  Said  gnaianty  to  afford  pro- 
tection shall  contain  the  name  and  address  of  the  party 
or  parties  making  the  sale  of  such  article  to  such  dealer, 
and  in  such  case,  if  such  guaranty  was  given  in  this 
State,  said  party  or  parties  shall  be  amenable  to  the 
prosecution,  tines  and  other  penalties  which  would  attach 
in  due  course  to  the  dealer  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act:  Provided,  however.  That  said  guaranty  shall  not 
afford  protection  to  the  vendor  in  any  case  if  said  prod- 
uct is  adulterated  or  misbranded  within  the  meaning 
of  this  act,  and  if  said  vendor  shall  have  been  previously 
notified  in  writing  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner 
to  that  effect:  Provided  further.  That  in  no  case  shall 
the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  serve  such  notice  upon 
any  vendor  of  any  such  product  until  said  Dairy  and 
Food  Commissioner  shall  have  notified  the  manufacturer 
or  jobber  of  any  such  product  of  the  findings  of  the  State 
Analj'st  with  reference  to  such  product;  such  notifica- 
tion to  such  manufacturer  or  jobber  shall  be  in  writing 
and  shall  be  mailed  ten  days  previous  to  any  notice  sent 
to  any  vendor  in  accordance  with  this  section. 

144.  Sec.  8.  Nothing  in  this  act  shall  affect  any  drug 
product  manufactured  in  this  State  for  export  to  any 
foreign  country  or  for  sale  in  any  other  state,  when  such 
drug  product  is  not  adulterated  or  misbranded  within 
the  meaning  of  the  laws  of  such  foreign  country  or  state ; 
but  if  said  article  shall  be  in  fact  sold  or  offered  for 
sale  for  use  or  consumption  within  this  State,  then  such 
article  shall  not  be  exempt  from  the  operation  of  any 
of  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

145.  Sec.  9.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  prosecuting 
attorney,  when  called  upon  by  tlie  said  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner,  or  by  any  person  by  him  authorized  as 
aforesaid,  to  render  any  legal  assistance  in  his  power  in 
proceedings  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  or  any  sub- 
sequent act  relative  to  the  adulteration  or  misbranding 
of  drug  products. 

146.  Sec.  10.     Whoever  shall   do  any  of  the  acts  or 


70  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

things  prohibited,  or  wilfully  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any 
of  the  acts  or  things  enjoined  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way 
violate  any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  on  conviction  thereof  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  nor  more  than 
five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county 
jail  for  a  period  of  not  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both 
fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

147.  Sec.  11.  The  sum  of  six  thousand  dollars  is 
hereby  appropriated  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
thirtieth,  nineteen  hundred  eleven,  and  for  each  fiscal 
year  thereafter  there  is  hereby  appropriated  the  sum  of 
six  thousand  dollars.  Out  of  the  amounts  appropriated 
by  this  act  shall  be  paid  all  salaries  and  expenses  pro- 
vided for  herein. 


TURPENTINE. 

(Act  No.   175,  Public  Acts,   1911.) 

AN  ACT  regulating  the  sale  of  turpentine  and  providing  penal- 
ties for  the  violation  of  this  act. 

148.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  manufacture, 
mix  for  sale,  sell  or  offer  for  sale  for  other  than  medical 
purposes,  under  the  name  of  turpentine  or  under  a  name 
composed  of  a  part  or  parts  of  the  word  turpentine,  or 
spirits  of  turpentine,  any  article  which  is  not  wholly  dis- 
tilled from  resin,  turpentine  gum  or  scrape  from  pine 
trees  and  unmixed  and  unadulterated  with  oil,  benzine 
or  other  foreign  substance  of  any  kind  whatsoever,  un- 
less the  package  containing  the  same  shall  be  stenciled 
or  marked  with  letters  not  less  than  one  inch  square 
and  one-fourth  inch  apart  "adulterated  turpentine,"  ex- 
cept turpentine  produced  from  turpentine  gum  extracted 
wholly  from  pine  wood,  which  turpentine  is  known  as^ 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  71 


"wood  turpentine"  must  be  stenciled  or  marked  "wood 
turpentine"  with  letters  not  less  than  one  inch  square 
and  one  fourth  inch  apart.  When  such  wood  turpentine 
is  mixed  and  adulterated  with  oil,  benzine  or  other  for- 
eign substance  of  any  kind  whatsoever,  the  container 
shall  be  stenciled  or  marked  ''adulterated  wood  turpen- 
tine" with  letters  not  less  than  one  inch  square  and  one- 
fourth  inch  apart.  When  wood  turpentine  is  mixed  with 
turpentine  distilled  from  resin,  turpentine  gum,  or 
scrape  from  pine  trees,  in  any  quantity  whatsoever,  the 
container  shall  be  stenciled  or  marked  "wood  turpen- 
tine'- with  letters  not  less  than  one  inch  square  and  one- 
fourth  inch  apart :  Provided,  That  if  the  contents  of  the 
package  be  less  than  twenty-five  gallons,  the  type  shall 
not  be  less  than  two  lines  pica  in  size.  Nothing  herein 
contained  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  the  manufacture 
or  sale  of  any  compound*  or  imitation  providing  the  con- 
tainer shall  be  plainly  marked  and  the  purchaser  notified 
as  aforesaid. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  372,  P.  A.  1913.] 

141).  Sec.  2.  The  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  of 
Michigan  shall  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  and 
the  penal  statutes  relating  thereto,  and  such  commis- 
sioner, his  assistants,  experts,  chemists  and  agents  shall 
have  access  and  ingress  to  the  places  of  business,  stores 
and  buildings  used  for  the  sale  of  turpentine,  and  may 
open  any  package,  can  or  jar  or  other  receptacle  contain- 
ing any  turpentine  that  ma^^  be  manufactured,  sold  or 
offered  for  sale  in  violation  of  this  statute.  The  inspect- 
ors, assistants  or  chemists  appointed  by  such  commis- 
sioner shall  perform  like  duties  and  have  like  authority 
under  this  chapter  and  the  penal  statutes  relating  there- 
to as  is  provided  by  law  in  other  cases.  Such  commis- 
sioner shall  publish  bulletins  from  time  to  time  giving 
the  results  of  the  inspections  and  analyses  with  such 
information  as  he  deems  suitable. 

150.  Sec.  3.  Whosoever  violates  any  provision  of  law 
relating  to  the  labeling,  marking  or  stenciling  of  turpen- 


72  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

tine  or  wood  turpentine  by  manufacturers  or  distribu- 
tors thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  more  than  fifty  dollars  for 
the  first  offense,  and  for  each  subsequent  offense  shall  be 
fined  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hun- 
dred dollars,  or  imprisoned  not  less  than  thirty  days 
nor  more  than  one  hundred  days  or  both. 


BABCOCK  TEST. 

(Act  No.   280,   Public  Acts,   1907.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  sampling  and  testing  of  milk  and 
cream  and  the  use  of  the  Babcock  test  and  to  make  the  viola- 
tion of  any  provision  hereof  a  misdemeanor. 

151.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact ^  In  taking  samples  of  milk  or  cream  from  any 
milk  can,  cream  can  or  any  container  of  milk  or  cream, 
the  contents  of  such  milk  can,  cream  can,  ov  container 
of  milk  and  cream  shall  first  be  thoroughly  mixed  either 
by  stirring  or  otherwise  and  the  sample  shall  be  taken 
immediately  after  mixing,  or  by  any  other  method  which 
gives  a  representative  average  sample  of  the  contents, 
and  it  is  hereby  made  a  misdemeanor  to  take  samples  by 
any  method  which  does  not  give  a  representative  aver- 
age sample  where  milk  or  cream  is  bought  or  sold,  and 
where  the  value  of  said  milk  or  cream  is  determined  by 
the  butter  fat  contained  in  the  same  by  the  Babcock 
test. 

152.  Sec.  2.  In  the  use  of  the  Babcock  test  the  term 
"standard .  Babcock  testing  glassware"  shall  apply  to 
glassware   complying  with   the  following  specifications: 

(a)     Standard  Milk  Test  Bottles. 

Graduation. — The  total  per  cent  graduation  shall  be 
eight  per  cent.  The  graduated  portion  of  the  neck  shall 
have  a  length  of  not  less  than  sixty-three  five-tenths  mi  Hi- 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  '73 

meters  (two  and  one-half  inches).  The  graduation  shall 
represent  whole  per  cent,  live-tenths  per  cent,  and  tenths 
per  cent.  The  tenth  per  cent  graduations  shall  not  be 
less  than  three  millimeters  in  length;  the  five-tenths  per 
cent  graduations  shall  be  one  millimeter  longer  than  the 
tenths  per  cent  graduations,  projecting  one  millimeter  to 
the  left;  the  whole  per  cent  graduations  shall  extend  at 
least  one-half  way  around  the  neck  to  the  right  and  pro- 
jecting two  millimeters  to  the  left  of  the  tenths  per 
cent  graduations.  Each  per  cent  graduation  shall  be 
numbered,  the  number  being  placed  on  the  left  of  the 
scale.  The  arrow  at  any  point  of  the  scale  shall  not  ex- 
ceed one-tenth  per  cent. 

Neck. — The  neck  shall  be  cylindrical  and  the  cylindri- 
cal shape  shall  extend  for  at  least  nine  millimeters  below 
the  lowest  and  above  the  highest  graduation  mark.  The 
top  of  the  neck  shall  be  flared  to  a  diameter  of  not  less 
than  ten  millimeters. 

Bulb. — The  capacity  of  the  bulb  up  to  the  junction  of 
the  neCk  shall  not  be  less  than  forty-five  cubic  centi- 
meters. The  shape  of  the  bulb  may  be  either  cylindrical 
or  conical  with  the  smallest  diameter  at  the  bottom.  If 
cylindrical,  the  outside  diameter  shall  be  between  thirty- 
four  and  thirty-six  millimeters;  if  conical,  the  outside 
diameter  of  the  base  shall  be  between  thirty-one  and 
thirtj^-three  millimeters,  and  the  maximum  diameter  be- 
tween thirty- five  and  thirty-seven  millimeters. 

The  charge  of  the  bottle  shall  be  eighteen  grams. 

The  total  height  of  the  bottle  shall  be  between  one 
hundred  fifty  and  one  hundred  sixty-five  millimeters  (five 
and  seven-eighths  and  six  and  one-half  inches). 

(b)     Standard  Cream  Test  Bottles. 

Two  types  of  bottles  shall  be  accepted  as  standard 
cream  test  bottles,  a  fifty  per  cent  nine  gram  short-neck 
bottle  and  a  fifty  per  cent  nine  gram  long-neck  bottle. 

Fifty  per  cent  nine  gram  short-neck  bottles.  Gradua- 
tion.— The  total  per  cent  graduation  shall  be  fifty.  The 
graduated  portion  of  the  neck  shall  have  a  length  of  not 
less  than  sixty -three  five-tenths  millimeters  (two  and  one- 


74  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

half  inches).  The  graduation  shall  represent  five  per 
cent,  one  per  cent  and  five-tenths  per  cent.  The  five  per 
cent  graduations  shall  extend  at  least  one-half  way 
around  the  neck  of  the  bottle  (to  the  right).  The  five 
per  cent  graduations  shall  have  a  length  intermediate  be- 
tween the  five  per  cent  and  the  five-tenths  per  cent 
graduations.  Each  five  per  cent  graduation  shall  be 
numbered,  the  number  being  placed  on  the  left  of  the 
scale.  The  arrow  at  any  point  of  the  scale  shall  not  ex- 
ceed five-tenths  per  cent. 

Neck. — The  neck  shall  be  cylindrical  and  the  cylindri- 
cal shape  shall  extend  at  least  nine  millimeters  below  the 
lowest  and  nine  millimeters  above  the  highest  graduation 
mark.  The  top  of  the  neck  shall  be  flared  ito  a  diameter 
of  not  less  than  ten  millimeters. 

Bulb. — The  capacity  of  the  bulb  up  to  the  junction  of 
the  neck  shall  not  be  less  than  forty-five  cubic  centi- 
meters. The  shape  of  the  bulb  may  be  either  cylindrical 
or  conical  with  the  smallest  diameter  at  the  bottom.  If 
cylindrical,  the  outside  diameter  of  the  base  shall  be 
between  thirty-one  and  thirty-three  millimeters  and  the 
maximum  diameter  between  thirty-five  and  thirty-seven 
millimeters. 

The  charge  of  the  bottle  shall  be  nine  grams.  All 
bottles  shall  bear  on  top  of  the  neck  above  the  gradua- 
tions, in  plainly  legible  characters,  a  mark  defining  the 
weight  of  the  charge  to  be  used   (nine  grams) . 

The  total  height  of  the  bottle  shall  be  one  hundred  fifty 
and  one  hundred  sixty-five  millimeters  (five  and  seven- 
eighths  and  six  and  one-half  inches)  same  as  standard 
milk  test  bottles. 

Fifty  per  cent  nine  gram  long-neck  bottles. — The  same 
specifications  in  every  detail  as  specified  for  the  fifty  per 
cent  nine  gram  short-neck  bottle  shall  apply  for  the  long- 
neck  bottle  with  the  exception,  however,  that  the  total 
height  of  this  bottle  shall  be  between  two  hundred  ten 
and  two  hundred  thirty-five  millimeters  (eight  and  one- 
half  and  eight  and  seven-eighths  inches)    and  that  the 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS.  75 

total  length  of  the  graduation  shall  be  not  less  than  one 
hiuidred  twenty  millimeters. 

The  Standard  Babcock  Pipette. 

Total  length  of  pipette  shall  be  not  more  than  three 
hundred  thirty  niillimeters  (thirteen  and  one-fourth 
inches).  Outside  diameter  of  suction  tube  six  to  eight 
millimeters.  Length  of  suction  tube  one  hundred  twenty 
millimeters.  Outside  diameter  tube  one  hundred  to  one 
hundred  twentj'  millimeters.  Distance  of  graduation 
mark  above  bulb  thirty  to  sixty  millimeters.  Nozzle 
straight.  Delivery  seventeen  six-tenths  cubic  centimeters 
of  water  at  twenty  degrees  C.  in  five  to  eight  seconds. 

All  butter-fat  and  cream  scales  used  for  the  purpose 
of  determining  the  value  or  per  cent  of  butter-fat  con- 
tent of  milk  or  cream  by  the  Babcock  test  shall  be  subject 
to  the  following  specifications : 

1.  The  scale  shall  be  provided  with  a  graduated  face 
of  at  least  ten  divisions  over  which  the  pointer  shall  play. 

2.  The  pointer  must  reach  to  the  graduated  divisions 
and  shall  terminate  in  a  fine  point  to  enable  the  readings 
to  be  made  clearly  and  distinctly. 

3.  The  clear  interval  between  the  divisions  on  the 
graduated  face  shall  not  be  less  than  five  one-hundredths 
inch. 

4.  All  scales  whose  weight  indications  are  changed 
by  an  amount  greater  than  one-half  the  tolerance  allowed, 
when  set  in  any  position  on  a  surface  making  an  angle 
of  three  degrees  or  approximately  five  per  cent  with  the 
horizontal,  shall  be  equipped  with  leveling  screws  and  a 
device  which  will  indicate  when  the  scale  is  level :  Pro- 
vided, however,  That  the  scale  shall  be  rebalanced  at 
zero  each  time  its  position  is  altered  during  the  test. 

5.  The  addition  of  one-half  grain  to  the  scale  when 
loaded  to  capacity  shall  cause  a  movement  of  the  pointer 
at  least  equal  to  one  division  on  the  graduated  face. 

6.  The  sensibility  reciprocal  and  tolerance  of  cream 
test  and  butter-fat  test  scales  shall  be  one  half-grain 
(thirty  milligrams).  Every  person,  firm,  company,  asso- 
ciation, corporation  or  agent  thereof  buying  and  paying 


76  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

for  milk  or  cream  on  the  basis  of  the  amount  of  butter- 
fat  contained  therein  as  determined  by  the  Babcock  test 
shall  use  standard  Babcock  test  bottles,  pipettes  and 
accurate  weights  and  scales  as  defined  in  this  act. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  266,  1915.] 

153.  Sec.  3.  It  -shall  be  unlawful  for  the  owner,  man- 
ager, agent  or  any  employee  of  a  cheese  factory,  cream- 
ery, condensed  milk  factory  or  milk  depot  or  other  place 
where  milk  or  cream  is  tested  for  quality  or  value  to 
falsely  manipulate  or  under-read  or  over-read  the  Bab- 
cock test,  or  make  settlements  on  any  other  basis  than 
the  correct  reading  of  the  Babcock  test  or  any  other 
contrivance  used  for  determining  the  quality  or  value 
of  milk  or  cream  where  the  value  of  said  milk  or  cream 
is  determined  by  the  per  cent  of  butter  fat  contained  in 
the  same  or  to  make  any  false  determination  by  the  Bab- 
cock test  or  otherwise. 

154.  Sec.  4.  Whoever  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and 
upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of 
not  less  than  ten  dollars  nor  more  than  fifty  dollars  for 
each  and  every  offence  or  be  imprisoned  in  the  county 
jail  not  less  than  ten  days  nor  more  than  thirty  days. 


SAUSAGE. 

(Act  No.   151,   Public  Acts,   1913.) 

AN  ACT  providing  for  the  protection  of  the  public  health  and 
the  prevention  of  fraud  and  deception,  by  prohibiting  the  sale, 
the  offering  for  sale  or  exposing  for  sale  or  the  having  in 
possession  with  intent  to  sell,  of  adulterated  or  deleterious 
sausage;  defining  sausage;  and  prescribing  the  penalty  for  the 
violation  hereof. 

155.     Section  1.     The  People  of  the  Sfute  of  Michigan 
enact,  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  or  persons,  by 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS. 


himself,  herself  or  themselves,  or  by  his,  her  or  their 
agents,  setrvants  or  employes,  to  sell,  offer  for  sale, 
ex])ose  for  sale,  or  have  in  j)ossesion  with  intent  to  sell, 
sausage  that  is  adnlterated  within  the  meaning  of  this 
act.  Sansage  when  used  in  this  act  shall  be  deemed  to 
include  Bologna,  Wiene-wurst  and  Frankforts. 

loC).  Sec.  2.  For  the  purpose  of  this  act,  sausage  or 
sausage  meat  shall  be  held  to  be  a  comminuted,  meat  from 
neat  cattle  or  swine,  or  a  mixture  of  such  meats,  either 
fresh,  salted,  pickled  or  smoked,  with  added  salt  and 
spices,  and  with  or  without  the  addition  of  edible  animal 
fat,  blood  and  sugar,  or  subsequent  smoking.  It  shall 
contain  no  larger  amount  of  water  than  the  meats  from 
which  it  is  prepared  contain  when  in  their  fresh  condi- 
tion. 

157.  8ec.  3-  For  the  purpose  of  this  act,  sausage 
shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated : 

First,  If  it  contains  added  water  in  excess  of  the  quan- 
tity required  to  bring  the  amount  up  to  that  which  the 
meats  from  which  it  is  prepared  contain  immediately 
after  slaughter; 

Second,  If  it  contains  any  cereal  or  vegetable  flour; 

Third,  If  it  contains  any  coal-tar  dye,  boric  acid  or 
borates,  sulphites,  sulphur  dioxide,  sulphurous  acid,  or 
any  other  substances  injurious  or  deleterious  to  health ; 

Fourth,  If  it  contains  any  diseased,  contaminated, 
filthy  or  decomposed  substance;  or  is  manufactured,  in 
whole  or  in  part,  from  a  diseased,  contaminated,  filthy  or 
decomposed  substance,  or  a  substance  produced,  stored, 
transported  or  kept  in  a  way  or  manner  that  would 
render  the  article  diseased,  contaminated  or  unwhole- 
some; or  if  it  is  any  product  of  a  diseased  animal,  or  the 
product  of  any  animal  which  has  died  otherwise  than  by 
slaughter.  Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as 
prohibiting  the  sale  of  sausage  which  when  properly 
labeled  shall  conform  to  the  following  standard :  Sau- 
sage shall  not  contain .  cereal  in  excess  of  two  per  cent. 
When  cereal  is  added  its  presence  shall  be  noted  on  the 
label  or  on  the  product.    That  water  or  ice  shall  not  be 


78  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


added  to  it  except  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating  grind- 
ing, chopping  and  mixing,  in  which  case  the  added  water 
or  ice  shall  not  exceed  three  per  cent  except  as  pro- 
vided in  the  following  paragraph.  Sausages  of  the  class 
which  are  cooked  or  smoked,  such  as  Frankfort  style, 
Vienna  style  and  Bologna  style,  may  contain  added 
water  in  excess  of  three  per  cent,  but  not  in  excess  of 
amount  sufficient  to  make  the  sausage  palatable.  When 
water  in  excess  of  three  per  cent  is  added  to  this  class 
of  sausage,  the  statement  "Sausage,  water  and  cereal" 
shall  appear  on  the  label  or  on  the  product,  but  when  no 
cereal  is  added,  the  addition  of  water  need  not  be  stated. 

158.  Sec.  4.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of 
the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  sentenced 
to  pay  a  fine  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  dollars,  nor 
more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  or  to  undergo  an  im- 
prisonment of  not  less  than  thirty  days,  nor  more  than 
sixty  days,  or  both  or  either,  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court. 

159.  Sec.  5.  The  dairy  and  food  commissioner  shall 
be  charged  with  the  enforcement  of  the  provisions  of  this 
act. 


WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES. 

(Act  No.   168,  Public  Acts,   1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  a  state  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures,  state,  county  and  city  sealers  and  inspection  of 
weights  and  measures,  prescribing  their  powers  and  duties, 
providing  penalties  for  fraud  and  deception  in  the  use  of 
false  weights  and  measures  and  confiscation  thereof,  and  re- 
pealing sections  four  thousand  eight  hundred  eighty-two  to 
four  thousand  eight  hundred  ninety-seven  inclusive  of  the 
Compiled  Laws  of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven. 

,  160.     Section  1.     The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,   The   weights    and    measures    received   from   the 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  79 

United  States  under  a  resolution  of  congress  approved 
June  fourteen,  eighteen  hundred  thirty-six  and  such  new 
weights  and  measures  as  shall  be  received  from  the 
United  States  as  standard  weights  and  measures  in  addi- 
tion thereto  or  in  renewal  thereof,  and  such  as  shall  be 
supplied  by  the  state  in  conformity  therewith  and  certi- 
fied by  the  national  bureau  of  standards,  shall  be  the 
state  standards,  by  which  all  county  and  municipal 
stfindards  of  weights  and  measures  shall  be  tried,  proved 
and  sealed. 

161.  Sec.  2.  The  state  dairy  and  food  commissioner 
by  virtue  of  his  office  shall  be  state  superintendent  of 
weights  and  measures  during  his  term  of  office.  His 
deputy  shall  be  deputy  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures  and  all  inspectors  appointed  by  the  dairy  and 
food  commissioner  shall  be  state  inspectors  and  sealers 
of  weights  and  measures. 

162.  Sec.  3.  The  superintendent  of  weights  and  meas- 
ures shall  take  charge  of  the  standards  adopted  by  this 
article  as  the  standards  of  the  state,  and  cause  them  to 
be  kept  in  a  safe  and  suitable  place  in  the  office  of  the 
superintendent  from  which  they  shall  not  be  removed  ex- 
cept for  repairs  or  for  certification  and  he  shall  take 
all  other  necessary  precautions  for  their  safe  keeping. 
He  shall  maintain  the  state  standards  in  good  order  and 
shall  submit  them  at  least  once  in  ten  years  to  the  na- 
tional bureau  of  standards  for  certification.  He  shall  at 
least  once  in  five  years  try  and  prove  by  the  state  stand- 
ards all  weights,  measures  and  other  apparatus  which 
may  belong  to  any  county  or  city,  and  shall  ^eal  such 
when  found  to  be  accurate  stamping  on  them  the  letter 
"C"  and  the  last  two  figures  of  the  jeav  with  seals  which 
he  shall  have  and  keep  for  that  purpose.  He  shall  have 
and  keep  a  general  supervision  of  the  weights,  measures 
and  weighing  and  measuring  deyices  offered  for  sale, 
sold,  or  in  use  in  the  state.  He  shall,  upon  the  written, 
request  of  any  citizen,  firm,  corporation  or  educational 
institution  in  the  state  test  or  calibrate  weights,  meas- 
ures, weighing  or  measuring  devices,  and  instruments  or 


83  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

apparatus  used  as  standards  in  the  state.  He,  or  his 
deputy,  or  inspectors,  by  his  direction,  shall  at  least 
once  annually  test  all  scales,  weights,  and  measures  used 
in  checking  the  receipts  and  disbursements  of  supplies  in 
every  institution  for  the  maintenance  of  which  moneys 
are  appropriated  by  the  legislature,  and  he  shall  report 
in  writing  his  finding  to  the  supervisory  board  and  to  the 
executive  officer  of  the  institution  concerned,  and  at  the 
request  of  such  board  or  executive  officer  the  superin- 
tendent of  weights  and  measures  shall  appoint  in  writing 
one  or  more  employes  then  in  the  actual  service  of  each 
institution,  who  shall  act  as  special  deputies  without 
extra  compensation  for  the  purpose  of  checking  tliQ  re- 
ceipts and  disbursements  of  supplies.  He  shall  keep  a 
complete  record  of  standards,  balances  and  other  appara- 
tus belonging  to  the  state  and  take  a  receipt  for  same 
from  his  successor  in  office.  He  shall  annually  on  the 
first  day  of  July  make  to  the  governor  a  report  of  the 
work  done  by  his  office.  The  state  superintendent  or  his 
deputy,  or  inspectors,  at  his  direction,  shall  inspect  all 
standards  and  apparatus  used  by  the  counties  and  cities 
at  least  once  in  five  years  and  shall  keep  a  record  of  the 
same.  He,  or  his  deputy,  or  inspectors,  at  his  direction 
shall  at  least  once  in  five  years  visit  the  various  cities 
and  counties  of  the  state  in  order  to  inspect  the  work 
of  the  local  sealers,  and  in  the  performance  of  such 
duties,  he  may  inspect  the  weights,  measures,  balances, 
or  any  other  weighing  appliance  of  anj  citizen,  firm,  or 
corporation,  and  shall  have  the  same  power  as  the  local 
sealer  of.  weights  and  measures.  The  superintendent 
shall  issue  from  time  to  time,  regulations  for  the  guid- 
ance of  city  and  county  sealers,  and  the  said  regulations 
shall  govern  the  procedure  to  be  followed  by  the  afore- 
said officers  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties. 

163.  Sec.  4.  The  bpard  of  supervisors  of  each  county 
and  the  commissioner  or  common  council  of  each  city 
who  may  in  their  discretion  appoint  a  sealer  under  this 
act,  shall  procure  at  the  expense  of  the  county  or  city, 
and  shall  keep  at  all  times,  a  complete  set  of  weights 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  81 

and  measures  and  other  apparatus  of  such  material 
and  construction  as  said  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures  may  direct.  All  such  weights,  measures,  and 
other  apparatus  having  been  tried  and  accurately  proven 
by  him,  shall  be  sealed  and  certified  to  by  the  state 
superintendent  as  hereinbefore  provided;  and  shall  be 
then  deposited  with  and  preserved  by  the  county  or  city 
sealer  as  public  standards  for  such  county  or  city. 

164.  Sec.  5.  The  board  of  supervisors  of  each  county 
may  in  its  discretion  appoint  a  county  sealer  of  weights 
and  measures  in  each  county  for  a  term  of  two  years. 
He  shall  be  paid  a  salary  to  be  determined  by  said 
board,  and  no  fee  shall  be  charged  by  him  or  by  the 
county  for  the  inspection,  testing,  or  sealing  of  weights, 
measures,  or  weighing  or  measuring  devices;  where  not 
otherwise  provided  by  law,  the  county  sealer  shall  have 
the  power  within  his  county,  and  the  state  superintend- 
ent, his  deputies  and  inspectors,  within  the  state,  to  in- 
spect, test,  try,  and  ascertain  if  they  are  correct,  all 
weights,  scales,  beams,  measures  of  every  kind,  instru- 
ments or  mechanical  devices  for  measuring  and  tools, 
appliances  and  accessories  connected  with  any  and  all 
such  instruments  or  measures  kept,  offered,  or  exposed 
for  sale,  sold  or  used  or  employed  within  the  county  by 
any  proprietor,  agent,  lessee,  or  employe  in  proving  the 
size,  quantity,  extent,  area,  or  measurement  of  quantir 
ties,  things,  produce,  articles  for  distribution  or  con- 
sumption offered  or  submitted  by  such  person  or  per- 
sons for  sale,  hire,  or  award;  and  they  shall  have  the 
power  to  and  shall  from  time  to  time  weigh  or  measure 
packages  or  amounts  of  commodities  of  whatsoever  kind 
kept  for  the  purpose  of  sale,  offered  for  sale,  or  sold  or 
in  the  process  of  delivery,  in  order  to  determine  whether 
the  same  contains  the  amount  represented,  and  whether 
they  be  offered  for  sale  or  sold  in  a  manner  in  accord- 
ance with  law.  The  county  sealer  shall  at  least  once 
each  year,  and  as  much  oftener  as  he  may  deem  neces- 
sary, see  that  the  weights,  measures,  and  all  apparatus 
11 


82  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

used  in  the  county  are  correct.  The  county  and  state 
inspectors  may  for  the  purpose  above  mentioned  and  in 
the  general  performance  of  their  official  duties  enter  or 
go  in  upon,  and  without  formal  warrant,  any  stand, 
place,  building,  or  premises,  or  stop  any  vendor,  peddler, 
junk  dealer,  coal  wagon,  ice  wagon,  delivery  wagon,  or 
any  dealer  whatsoever  and  require  him,  if  necessary,  to 
proceed  to  some  place  which  the  sealer  may  specify,  for 
the  purpose  of  making  the  proper  tests.  Whenever  the 
county  sealer  or  state  inspectors  find  a  violation  of  the 
statute  relating  to  weights  and  measures,  they  shall 
cause  the  violator  to  be  prosecuted.  Whenever  any 
sealer  or  inspector  compares  weights,  measures,  or 
weighing  and  measuring  instruments  and  finds  that  they 
correspond,  or  causes  them  to  correspond,  with  the 
standards  in  his  possession,  he  shall  seal  or  mark  such 
weights,  measures,  or  weighing  or  measuring  instruments 
with  appropriate  devices  to  be  approved  by  the  state 
superintendent  of  weights  and  measures.  The  county 
sealer  shall  keep  a  complete  record  of  all  of  his  official 
acts  and  shall  make  an  annual  report  to  the  board  of 
supervisors  and  an  annual  report  duly  sworn  to  on  the 
first  day  of  July  to  the  state  superintendent  of  weights 
and  measures  on  blanks  to  be  furnished  by  the  superin- 
tendent. The  county  sealer  of  weights  and  measures 
shall  forthwith  on  his  appointment  give  a  bond  in  the 
penal  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  with  sureties  to  be 
approved  by  the  appointing  power  for  the  faithful  per- 
formance of  the  duties  of  his  office:  Provided,  however. 
That  nothing  in  the  above  shall  be  construed  to  prevent 
two  or  more  counties  from  combining  the  whole  or  any 
part  of  their  districts  as  may  be  agreed  upon  by  the 
board  of  supervisors  with  one  set  of  standards  and  one 
sealer,  upon  the  written  consent  of  the  state  superin- 
tendent of  weights  and  measures.  A  county  sealer  ap- 
pointed in  pursuance  of  such  an  agreement  for  such 
combination,  shall,  subject  to  the  terms  of  his  appoint- 
ment, have  the  same  authority,  jurisdiction,  and  duties 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  83 

as  if  lie  had  been  appointed  by  each  of  the  authorities 
who  are  party  to  the  agreement. 

165.  Sec.  6.  Any  incorporated  city  in  this  state  may 
in  its  discretion  appoint  a  city  sealer  of  weights  and 
measui-es  under  this  act.  He  shall  be  appointed  by  the 
mayor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  com- 
mon council.  He  shall  perform  in  said  city  the  duties 
and  have  like  powers  as  the  county  sealer  in  the  county. 
In  those  cities  in  which  no  sealer  is  appointed  as  above, 
the  county  sealer  of  the  county,  if  there  be  one,  shall 
perform  in  said  cities  the  duties  and  have  like  powers  as 
in  the  county:  Provided,  however.  That  nothing  in  the 
above  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  any  county  and  a 
city  situated  therein  from  combining  the  whole  or  any 
part  of  their  districts  as  may  be  agreed  upon  with  one 
sealer,  subject  to  the  written  approval  of  the  state 
superintendent  of  weights  and  measures.  A  sealer  ap- 
pointed in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  for  such  combina- 
tion shall,  subject  to  the  terms  of  his  appointment,  have 
the  same  authority,  jurisdiction,  and  duties  as  if  he  had 
been  appointed  by  each  of  the  authorities  who  are  par- 
ties to  the  agreement. 

166.  Sec.  7.  Any  person  who  by  himself  or  by  his 
servant  or  agent  or  as  the  servant  or  the  agent  of 
another  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  sell,  or  use  or 
retain  in  his  possession,  a  false  weight  or  measure  or 
weighing  or  measuring  device  or  any  weight  or  measure 
or  weighing  or  measuring  device  which  has  not  been 
sealed  by  the  sealer  of  weights  and  measures  within  five 
years,  in  the  buying  or  selling  of  any  commodity  or  thing 
or  for  hire  or  reward;  or  who  shall  dispose  of  any  con- 
demned weight,  measure  or  weighing  or  measuring  de- 
vice contrary  to  law  or  remove  any  tags  placed  thereon 
by  the  sealer  of  weights  and  measures;  or  any  person 
who  by  himself  or  by  his  servant  or  agent,  or  as  the  ser- 
vant or  agent  of  another,  shall  knowingly  sell  or  offer 
or  expose  for  sale  less  than  the  quantity  he  represents, 
or  sell  or  offer  or  expose  for  sale  any  such  commodity 
in  a  manner  contrary  to  law ;  or  any  person  who  by  him- 


84  STATE   OF   MICHIGAN. 

self  or  by  his  servant  or  agent,  or  as  the  servant  or 
agent  of  another,  shall  sell  or  offer  for  sale  or  have  in 
his  possession  for  the  purpose  of  selling  any  device  or 
instrument  to  be  used  to,  or  calculated,  to  falsify  any 
weight  or  measure,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty 
dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars  or  by  im- 
prisonment for  not  more  than  three  months  or  by  both 
such  fine  and  imprisonment  upon  first  conviction;  but 
upon  a  second  or  subsequent  conviction  he  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more 
than  five  hundred  dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  for  not  more  than  one  year  or  by  both  such 
fine  and  imprisonment. 

167.  Sec.  8.  The  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures,  his  deputy,  inspectors,  and  the  county  and 
city  sealers  of  weights  and  measures  are  hereby  made 
special  policemen,  and  are  authorized  to  seize,  for  use 
as  evidence  and  without  formal  warrant  any  false  or  un- 
sealed weight,  measure  or  weighing  or  measuring  device 
or  package  or  amounts  of  commodities,  found  to  be  used, 
retained  or  offered  or  exposed  for  sale  or  sold  in  viola- 
tion of  law. 

168.  Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  hinder  or  ob- 
struct in  any  way,  the  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures,  his  deputy,  or  inspectors,  or  any  county  or 
city  sealer,  in  the  performance  of  his  official  duties  shall 
be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  punished  upon 
conviction  thereof,  in  any  court  of  competent  jurisdic- 
tion, by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  two 
hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail 
for  not  more  than  ninety  days  or  by  both  such  fine  and 
imprisonment. 

169.  Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall  impersonate  in 
any  way  the  superintendent  of  weights  and  measures, 
his  deputies,  inspectors,  or  any  county  or  city  sealer,  by 
use  of  his  seal  or  otherwise,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
one  hundred  dollars  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars, 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  85 

or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than 
ninety  days  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment. 

170.  Sec.  11.  Sections  four  thousand  eight  hundred 
eighty-two,  four  thousand  eight  hundred  eighty-three, 
four  thousand  eight  hundred  eighty-four,  four  thousand 
eight  hundred  eighty-five,  four  thousand  eight  hundred 
eighty-six,  four  thousand  eight  hundred  eighty-seven, 
four  thousand  eight  hundred  eighty-eight,  four  thousand 
eight  hundred  eighty-nine,  four  thousand  eight  hundred 
ninety,  four  thousand  eight  hundred  ninety-one,  four 
thousand  eight  hundred  ninety-two,  four  thousand  eight 
hundred  ninety-three,  four  thousand  eight  hundred 
ninety-four,  four  thousand  eight  hundred  ninety-five, 
four  thousand  eight  hundred  ninety-six  and  four  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  ninety-seven,  of  the  Compiled  Laws 
of  eighteen  hundred  ninety-seven,  relative  to  weights  and 
measures,  are  hereby  repealed. 


AN  ACT  to  provide  for  the  weight  per  bushel,  of  certain  grain, 
dried  fruit,  coal,  vegetables  and  products. 

171.  (O.  L.  4900)  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State 
Michigan  enact,  That  whenever  wheat,  rye,  shelled  corn, 
corn  on  the  cob,  corn  meal,  oats,  buckwheat,  beans,  clo- 
ver seed,  timothy  seed,  flax  seed,  hemp  seed,  millet  seed, 
blue  grass  seed,  red  top  seed,  barley,  dried  apples,  dried 
peaches,  potatoes,  potatoes  (sweet),  onions,  turnips, 
peas,  cranberries,  dried  plums,  castor  beans,  salt,  min- 
eral coal,  Hungarian  grass  seed,  orchard  grass  seed, 
osage  orange  seed,  shall  be  sold  by  the  bushel,  and  no 
special  agreement  as  to  the  measure  or  weight  thereof 
shall  be  made  by  the  parties,  the  measure  thereof  shall 
be  ascertained  by  weight  and  shall  be  computed  as  fol- 
lows, viz. : 

Sixty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  wheat ; 

Fifty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  rye; 


STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 


Fifty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  shelled  corn; 
Seventy  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  corn  on  the  cob ; 
Fifty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  corn  meal ; 
Thirty-two  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  oats; 
Forty-eight  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  buckwheat; 
Sixty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  beans ; 
Sixty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  clover  seed; 
Forty-five  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  timothy  seed; 
Fifty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  flax  seed; 
Forty-four  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  hemp  seed; 
Fifty   pounds   for   a  bushel   of   millet   or   Hungarian 

grass  seed; 
Fourteen  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  blue  grass  seed; 
Fourteen  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  red  top  seed; 
Forty-eight  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  barley; 
Twenty -two  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  dried  apples ; 
Twenty-eight  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  dried  peaches; 
Sixty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  potatoes; 
Fifty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  sweet  potatoes; 
Fifty-four  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  onions; 
Fifty-eight  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  turnips; 
Sixty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  peas ; 
Forty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  cranberries; 
Twenty -eight  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  dried  plums; 
Forty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  castor  beans; 
Fifty-six  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  Michigan  salt; 
Eighty  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  mineral  coal; 
Fourteen  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  orchard  grass  seed; 
Thirty-three  pounds  for  a  bushel  of  osage  orange  seed. 


DAIRY  AND   POOD   LAWS.  87 


UNLAWFUL  DISCRIMINATION. 

(Act  No.   103,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  unlawful  discrimination  in  the  purchase  of 
poultry,  eggs,  milk,  cream  and  butter-fat,  and  to  provide  a 
punishment  for  the  same. 

172.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  Any  person,  firm,  copartnership  or  corporation 
engaged  in  the  business  of  buying  poultry,  eggs,  milk, 
cream  or  butter-fat  for  the  purpose  of  manufacture, 
who  shall  with  the  intention  of  creating  a  monopoly  or 
destroying  the  business  of  a  competitor,  discriminate  be- 
tween different  sections,  localities,  communities  or  cities 
of  this  State  by  purchasing  such  commodity  at  a  higher 
price  or  rate  in  one  locality  than  is  paid  for  the  same 
commodity  by  said  person,  firm,  copartnership  or  corpo- 
ration in  any  other  locality,  after  making  due  allowance 
for  the  difference,  if  any,  in  the  actual  cost  of  transpor- 
tation from  the  locality  of  purchase  to  the  locality  of 
manufacture,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  unfair  dis- 
crimination, and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  not  exceeding  five  hundred  dollars  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not  to  exceed  six 
months. 


88  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


COMMISSION  MERCHANTS. 

(Act  No.  184,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  business  of  selling  farm  products  on 
commission,  providing  all  commission  merchants  dealing  in 
farm  products  shall  be  licensed,  to  provide  against  and  punish 
fraud  and  deception  in  the  sale  of  farm  products  on  commis- 
sion, and  defining  the  duties  of  the  State  dairy  and  food  com- 
missioner relative  thereto. 

173.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact y  As  used  in  this  article: 

1.  The  term  "commission  merchant"  shall  include 
every  person,  firm,  association  and  corporation,  licensed 
under  this  article  to  receive,  sell  or  offer  for  sale  on 
commission  within  this  State  any  kind  of  farm  produce. 

2.  The  term  "farm  produce"  shall  include  all  agricul- 
tural, horticultural,  vegetable  and  fruit  products  of  the 
soil,  and  meats,  poultry,  eggs,  dairy  products,  nuts  and 
honey,  but  shall  not  include  timber  products. 

174.  Sec.  2.  On  and  after  October  first,  nineteen  hun- 
dred thirteen,  no  person,  firm,  association  or  corporation, 
whose  principal  place  of  business  shall  be  located  in  any 
city  in  this  State,  shall  receive,  sell  or  offer  for  sale  on 
commission  within  this  State  any  kind  of  farm  produce, 
without  a  license  as  provided  in  this  article.  Every 
person,  firm,  association  and  corporation  in  this  State 
receiving  farm  produce  for  sale  on  commission  shall 
annually  on  or  before  October  first,  file  an  application 
with  the  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner  for  a  license 
to  do  a  commission  business  in  farm  produce.  Such  ap- 
plication shall  state  the  kind  or  kinds  of  produce  which 
the  applicant  proposes  to  handle,  the  full  name  of  the 
person  or  corporation  applying  for  such  license,  and  if 
the  applicant  be  a  firm  or  association,  the  full  name  of 
each  member  of  the  firm  or  association,  the  city  and 
street  number  at  which  the  business  is  to  be  conducted, 
and  such  other  facts  as  the  State  dairv  and  food  com- 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS. 


missioner  shall  prescribe.  Such  applicant  shall  further 
satisfy  the  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner  of  his  or 
its  character,  responsibility  and  good  faith  in  seeking  to 
carry  on  a  commission  business.  The  State  dairy  and 
food  commissioner  shall  thereupon  issue  to  such  appli- 
cant, on  payment  of  fifteen  dollars,  in  cities  of  less  than 
twenty  thousand  population,  and  twenty-five  dollars,  in 
cities  of  more  than  twenty  thousand  population,  a  li- 
cense entitling  the  applicant  to  conduct  the  business  of 
receiving  and  selling  farm  produce  on  commission  at 
the  place  named  in  the  application  until  the  tenth  day 
of  October  next  following.  Such  license  shall  not  be 
issued,  however,  to  any  applicant  if  during  the  preced- 
ing year  a  complaint  from  any  consignor  of  farm  pro- 
duce for  sale  on  commission  shall  have  been  filed  with 
the  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner  against  such  ap- 
plicant for  any  of  the  grounds  specified  in  section  four 
hereof,  and  such  complaint  shall  have  been  established 
as  true  and  just  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  commissioner 
after  such  complaint  shall  have  been  investigated  by  the 
commissioner  in  the  manner  provided  by  section  three 
of  this  act. 

175.  Sec.  3.  The  commissioner  and  his  assistants  shall 
have  power  to  investigate,  upon  the  complaint  of  an  in- 
terested person,  or  of  his  own  motion,  the  record  of  any 
person,  firm  or  corporation  applying  for  a  license,  or 
any  transaction  involving  the  solicitation,  receipt,  trans- 
portation, sale  or  attempted  sale  of  farm  produce  on 
a  commission  basis,  including  the  making  of  charges  in 
selling,  carting,  or  other  services,  the  failure  to  make 
proper  and  true  accounts  and  settlements  at  prompt 
and  regular  intervals,  the  making  of  false  statements  as 
to  condition,  quality  or  quantity  of  goods  received  or 
while  in  storage,  the  making  of  false  statements  as  to 
market  conditions,  or  the  failure  to  make  payment  for 
goods  received  or  other  alleged  injurious  transactions; 
and  for  such  purpose  may  examine  the  ledgers,  books  of 
account,  memoranda  or  other  documents  of  any  com- 
mission merchant  and  may  take  testimony  therein  under 


90  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

oath;  but  information  relating  to  the  general  business  of 
any  such  person,  contained  in  such  investigation  and 
not  relating  to  the  immediate  purpose  thereof  shall  be 
deemed  of  a  confidential  nature  by  the  commissioner,  his 
assistants  and  employes.  When  a  complaint  is  filed 
with  the  commissioner,  he  shall  attempt  to  secure  an 
explanation  or  adjustment;  failing  this,  within  ten  days 
he  shall  cause  a  copy  thereof,  together  with  a  notice  of 
a  time  and  place  for  a  hearing  on  such  complaint,  to  be 
served  personally,  or  by  mail,  upon  such  commission 
merchants.  If  served  by  mail  such  complaint  and  notice 
shall  be  directed  to  such  commission  merchant  at  his 
place  of  business  and  the  postage  prepaid  thereon.  Such 
service  shall  be  made  at  least  seven  days  before  the  hear- 
ing. At  the  time  and  place  appointed  for  such  hearing, 
which  shall  be  within  the  county  where  the  commission 
merchant  is  licensed  to  do  business,  the  commissioner  or 
his  assistants  shall  hear  the  parties  to  such  complaint, 
shall  have  power  to  administer  an  oath,  and  shall  enter 
in  the  office  of  the  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner  a 
decision  either  dismissing  such  complaint  or  specifying 
the  fact  which  he  deemed  established  on  such  hearing. 
176.  Sec.  4.  The  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner 
may  decline  to  grant  a  license  or  may  revoke  a  license  al- 
ready granted,  where  he  is  satisfied  of  the  existence  of 
the  following  cases  or  either  of  them : 

1.  Where  false  charges  have  been  imposed  for  hand- 
ling or  services,  or  charges  other  than  as  by  a  schedule 
agreed  on  by  the  parties,  or  other  than  those  customary 
in  the  trade; 

2.  Where  there  has  been  a  failure  to  account  prompt- 
ly and  properly  or  to  make  settlements  with  intent  to 
defraud ; 

3.  Where  there  have  been  false  statements  as  to  con- 
dition, quality  or  quantity  of  goods  received  or  held  for 
sale  on  commission; 

4.  Where  there  have  been  false  or  misleading  state- 
ments as  to  market  condition  with  intent  to  deceive; 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  91 

5.  Where  there  have  been  combinations  to  fix  prices 
below  the  market  level; 

6.  Where  there  has  been  a  continual  course  of  deal- 
ings of  such  nature  as  to  satisfy  the  commissioner  of  in- 
ability of  the  commission  merchant  to  properly  conduct 
the  business,  or  of  an  intent  to  deceive  or  defraud  cus- 
tomers ; 

7.  Where  the  commission  merchant  directly  or  indi- 
rectly purchases  the  goods  for  his  own  account  without 
prior  authority  therefor,  or  without  notifying  the  con- 
signor thereof. 

177.  Sec.  5.  The  action  of  the  commissioner  in  refus- 
ing to  grant  a  license,  or  in  revoking  a  license  granted 
under  this  act,  shall  be  subject  to  review  by  a  writ  of  cer- 
tiorari, and  if  such  proceedings  are  begun;  until  the 
final  determination  of  certiorari  proceedings  and  all  ap- 
peals therefrom,  the  license  of  such  commission  mer- 
chant shall  be  deemed  to  be  in  full  force  and  effect,  or 
if  such  license  shall  have  been  refused,  such  commission 
merchant  shall  not  be  deemed  to  have  violated  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act,  prohibiting  the  transaction  of  such 
business  without  a  license,  provided  the  fee  for  such 
license  shall  have  been  paid. 

178.  Sec.  6.  The  dairy  and  food  commissioner  shall 
publish  in  pamphlet  form  as  often  as  he  thinks  is  neces- 
sary, a  list  of  all  the  licensed  commission  merchants. 

179.  Sec.  7.  The  funds  received  for  the  license  issued 
under  section  two  of  this  act  shall  be  paid  into  the 
State  treasury  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  the  State  dairy 
and  food  department. 

180.  Sec.  8.  If  any  shipper  of  farm  produce  to  a 
commission  merchant  be  dissatisfied  with  any  statement 
relative  to  the  sale  of  such  shipment,  he  may  apply  to 
the  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner,  in  writing,  with- 
in sixty  days  of  making  such  shipment,  for  an  investiga- 
tion. The  State  dairy  and  food  commissioner  shall  treat 
such  application  as  a  complaint,  and  shall  cause  a  full 
investigation   of   the   transaction   complained   of   te   be 


92  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

made  either  by  himself,  or  one  of  his  assistants  in  the 
manner  provided  by  section  five  of  this  act. 

181.  Sec.  9.  Any  person,  who  being  a  commission 
merchant  in  farm  produce,  shall  (a)  impose  false 
charges  for  handling  or  services  in  connection  with  food 
products,  or  (b)  fail  to  account  for  such  food  products, 
promptly  and  properly  and  to  make  settlements  therefor 
with  intent  to  defraud,  or  (c)  shall  make  false  or  mis- 
leading statement  or  statements  as  to  the  market  condi- 
tions with  intent  to  deceive,  or  (d)  enter  into  any  com- 
bination to  fix  prices  below  market '  level,  (e)  directly 
or  indirectly  purchase  for  his  or  its  own  account,  goods 
received  by  him  upon  consignment  without  prior  author- 
ity therefor  from  the  consignor,  or  shall  fail  to  promptly 
notify  the  consignor  of  such  purchase  on  his  own  ac- 
count, shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  con- 
viction thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars, 
and  the  cost  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  or  State  house  of  correction  and  reforma- 
tory at  Ionia,  for  not  less  than  six  months  nor  more 
than  three  years,  or  by  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court  in  each  and  every  offense. 

182.  Sec.  10.  Nothing  in  this  act  shall  apply  to  retail 
dealers,  real  estate  dealers  or  auctioneers  selling  farm 
products  on  commission. 

183.  Sec.  11.  Any  commission  merchant  of  farm  pro- 
duce, as  defined  in  sections  one  and  two  of  this  act,  who 
shall  fail  to  take  out  a  license  as  required  by  this  act, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  for  each 
and  every  offense  of  selling  farm  produce  on  commission 
without  such  license,  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not 
more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  and  the  costs  of  prosecu- 
tion, or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more 
than  thirty  days,  or  both  in  the  discretion  of  the  court, 
and  the  fact  that  any  person  advertises  and  holds  himself 
out  as  a  commission  merchant  of  farm  produce,  shall  be 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  93 

prima  facie  evidence  of  the  fact  that  he  is  a  commission 
merchant  of  farm  products  as  defined  by  this  act. 

[Added  by  Act  No.  18,  P.  A.  1915.] 


UNWHOLESOME  VEAL. 

(Act  No.  340,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  and  punish  the  sale  of  immature  and  un- 
wholesome calves  and  veal. 

184.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michi- 
^n  enact,  No  person  shall  for  the  purpose  of  selling, 
kill  a  calf  less  than  four  weeks  old,  and  no  person  shall 
sell  the  meat  of  any  such  calf  or  have  the  same  in  his 
possession  with  intent  to  sell  the  same  either  by  himself, 
his  agents,  or  servants. 

185.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violate  any 
of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars, 
and  the  costs  of  the  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in 
the  county  jail  not  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both 
such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court. 

186.  Sec.  3.  This  act  is  immediately  necessary  for 
the  public  health. 


94  STATE   OF   MICHIGAN. 

UNWHOLESOME    FOOD    FOR   ANIMALS. 

(Act  No.  179,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate,  prevent  and  punish  the  feeding  of  the 
flesh  of  old,  decrepit,  infirm,  sick  or  diseased  animals  and  un- 
wholesome offal  to  animals  or  fowls,  and  provide  a  penalty 
for  the  violation  thereof. 

187.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
embct,  No  person  shall  feed  to  animals  or  fowls  the  flesh 
of  an  animal  which  has  become  old,  decrepit,  infirm  or 
sick,  or  which  has  died  from  such  cause,  or  ofifal  or  flesh 
that  is  putrid  or  unwholesome. 

188.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or 
things  prohibited  by  this  act,  or  in  any  way  violates 
any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars  and  the  costs  of  prosecution, 
or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not  more  than 
ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court. 

189.  Sec.  3.  This  act  is  immediately  necessary  for 
the  preservation  of  the  public  health. 


CERTIFIED  MILK. 

(Act  No.  248,  Public  Acts,   1911.) 

AN  ACT  providing  for  the  incorporation  of  medical  milk  com- 
missions, and  certification  of  milk  produced  under  their  super- 
vision. 

190.     Section  1.    The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enacty  Authority  is  hereby  given  the  board  of  health  of 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  95 

any  city,  village  or  township  in  this  State,  so  constituted 
as  to  have  in  its  membership  two  or  more  physicians 
duly  authorized  to  practice  medicine  under  the  laws  of 
this  State,  to  appoint  five  physicians  duly  authorized 
to  practice  medicine  under  the  laws  of  this  State  a  medi- 
cal milk  commission  for  the  purpose  of  supervising  the 
production,  transportation  and  delivery  of  milk,  which 
it  is  intended  to  use  for  infant  feeding,  sick-room  clinical 
purposes  in  said  city,  village  or  township.  In  cities, 
villages  or  townships  not  having  a  board  of  health  so 
constituted  as  above  stated,  the  State  Board  of  Health 
may  make  such  appointment.  All  members  of  such  milk 
commission  shall  have  and  possess  all  the  powers  and  im- 
munities provided  by  this  act  or  any  other  act  relating 
to  the  appointees  of  such  board  of  health,  while  perform- 
ing their  duties  as  such  appointees.  One  member  of 
such  comission  shall  be  appointed  and  hold  oflSce  from 
the  time  of  such  appointment  until  the  end  of  the  thirty- 
first  of  December,  nineteen  hundred  eleven,  one  shall  be 
appointed  and  hold  oflSce  until  the  end  of  the  thirty-first 
of  December  nineteen  hundred  twelve,  one  shall  be  ap- 
pointed and  hold  oflSce  until  the  end  of  the  thirty-first  of 
December,  nineteen  hunderd  thirteen,  and  one  shall  be 
appointed  and  hold  office  until  the  end  of  the  thirty-first 
of  December,  nineteen  hundred  fourteen,  one  shall  be 
appointed  and  hold  office  until  the  end. of  the  thirty-first 
of  December,  nineteen  hundred  fifteen,  and  until  their 
several  successors  are  appointed  and  qualified.  The 
term  of  office  of  each  member  of  the  commission,  after 
the  termination  of  the  aforesaid  terms  shall  be  five 
years,  and  on  the  expiration  of  any  term  a  new  appoint- 
ment shall  be  made  in  the  same  manner  above  prescribed. 
No  more  than  one  milk  commission  shall  be  appointed 
for  any  one  city,  village,  or  township.  Any  and  all 
members  of  such  commission  may  be  removed  at  any 
time  by  the  board  which  appointed  them.  Such  medical 
milk  commission  shall  make  and  file  a  certificate  in 
writing  in  the  manner  hereinafter  mentioned. 


96  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

191.  Sec.  2.    Such  certificates  shall  set  forth : 

The  name  of  such  association,  which  shall  be  as  here- 
inafter designated; 

The  purpose  for  which  the  association  shall  be  formed ; 

The  names  and  residences  of  the  medical  directors 
who  shall  manage  the  affairs  of  the  association  for  the 
first  year  of  its  existence; 

The  city,  village  or  township  in  this  State  where  such 
association  shall  operate. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  196,  P.  A.,  1913.] 

192.  Sec.  3.  Such  certificate  shall  be  executed  in 
triplicate  and  acknowledged  before  some  person  within 
this  State  authorized  to  take  the  acknowledgment  of 
deeds,  and  one  copy  thereof  shall  be  filed  in  the  office 
of  the  clerk  of  the  county  where  the  purposes  of  such 
association  are  to  be  carried  out  and  one  copy  shall  be 
filed  in  the  office  of  the  Secetary  of  State;  said  certifi- 
cate or  copy  thereof  duly  certified  by  the  said  clerk  or 
Secretary  of  State  shall  be  evidence  in  all  courts  or 
places. 

193.  Sec.  4.     The  name  of  such  association  shall  be 

^'The  Medical  Milk  Commission  of  the 

(stating  whether  city,  village  or  township)  of 

(designating  the  name  of  city,  village  or 

township)     (designating   the   name 

of  the  county) County  of  Michigan.'' 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  196,  P.  A.,  1913.] 

194.  Sec.  5.  Such  medical  directors  shall  have  the 
power  from  time  to  time  to  make,  alter  and  amend  by- 
laws not  inconsistent  with  the  constitution  and  laws 
of  the  United  States  and  of  this  State,  and  to  appoint 
such  agents  and  officers  as  shall  in  their  judgment  tend 
to  promote  or  advance  any  purpose  or  purposes  of  such 
commission,  and  to  prescribe  their  respective  duties; 
and  for  the  regulating  of  the  conditions  under  which 
milk  shall  be  produced  by  any  dairyman  or  dairymen 
under  contract  with  such  commission. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  97 

195.  Sec.  6.  No  medical  director  of  any  association 
organized  under  this  act  sliall  receive,  directly  or  in- 
directly, from  such  association  or  dairyman,  or  dairy- 
men producing  milk  under  agreement  with  such  commis- 
sion, any  salary  or  emolument  or  any  compensation  of 
any  kind  or  character  for  any  services  rendered  under  the 
provisions  of  this  act,  and  any  medical  director  who  shall 
receive  any  salary,  emolument  or  any  compensation  of 
any  kind  or  character  for  such  services,  shall  be  liable 
to  a  penalty  of  one  hundred  dollars  to  be  recovered  in  an 
action  of  debt  by  the  association  of  which  he  is  a  mem- 
ber, and  in  addition  thereto  shall  be  removed  from  his 
ofiSce  as  a  member  of  said  association,  and  thereafter 
disqualified  from  becoming  a  member  of  any  association 
incorporated  under  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

196.  Sec.  7.  Every  such  association  shall  have  the 
power  to  enter  into  agreement  in  writing  with  any 
dairyman  or  dairymen  for  the  production  of  milk  under 
the  supervision  of  such  association  for  the  purposes 
enumerated  in  section  one  hereof,  and  to  prescribe  in 
such  agreement  the  conditions  under  which  such  milk 
shall  be  produced,  which  conditions  however,  shall  not  be 
below  the  standards  of  purity  and  quality  for  certified 
milk  as  fixed  by  the  American  association  of  medical 
milk  commissions,  and  the  standards  for  milk  now  fixed 
or  that  may  hereafter  be  fixed  by  the  Board  of  Health 
of  the  state  of  Michigan.  In  any  contract  entered 
into  by  any  such  commission  with  any  dairyman  or 
dairymen,  it  may  be  provided  that  such  medical  milk 
commission  may  designate  any  analyst,  chemist,  bacter- 
iologist, veterinarians,  medical  inspectors  or  other  per- 
sons who  in  its  judgment  may  be  necessary  for  the 
proper  carrying  out  of  the  purposes  of  such  commission 
for  employment  of  such  dairyman  or  dairymen,  and  to 
prescribe  and  define  their  powers  and  duties,  and  that 
such  persons  so  employed  by  such  dairyman  or  dairymen 
may  be  discharged  from  employment  whenever  such 
medical  milk  commission  may  request  such  discharge  or 
removal  in  writing. 

13 


98  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

197.  Sec.  8.  All  containers  of  any  kind  or  character 
used  in  the  carrying  or  distribution  of  milk  produced  by 
any  dairyman  or  dairymen  under  contract  with  any 
medical  milk  commission  shall  have  attached  thereto  or 
placed  thereon  a  certificate  or  seal  bearing  the  name  of 
the  medical  milk  commission  with  which  such  dairyman 
or  dairymen  producing  such  milk  shall  be  under  con- 
tract, which  certificate  shall  have  printed,  stamped  or 
written  thereon  the  day  or  date  of  the  production  of  the 
milk  contained  in  any  such  container  and  the  words 
^'certified  milk"  in  plain  and  legible  form. 

198.  Sec.  9.  The  work  and  methods  of  any  milk  com- 
mission organized  under  this  act  and  of  the  dairies  of 
which  milk  is  produced  under  contract  with  any  such 
commission,  shall  at  all  times  be  subject  to  investigation 
and  scrutiny  by  the  local  board  of  health  and  the  Board 
of  Health  of  the  State  of  Michigan.  The  secretary  of 
said  State  Board  of  Health  and  the  local  health  officer 
shall  be  ex-officio  members  of  every  milk  commission  or- 
ganized under  this  act. 

199.  Sec.  10.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall 
sell  or  exchange  or  offer  or  expose  for  sale  or  exchange 
in  any  city,  village  or  township  as  and  for  certified  milk, 
any  milk  which  is  not  certified  by  the  medical  milk  com- 
mission of  that  city,  village  or  township,  and  which  is 
not  produced  in  conformity  with  the  methods  and  regu- 
lations for  the  production  of  certified  milk  from  time 
to  time  adopted  by  the  American  association  of  medical 
milk  commissions,  and  which  is  below  the  standards  of 
purity  and  quality  for  certified  milk  as  fixed  by  the 
American  association  of  medical  milk  commissions. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  196,  P.  A.,  1913.] 

200.  Sec.  11.  Whoever  shall  by  himself,  servant  or 
agent  sell,  exchange  or  deliver  or  have  in  his  custody 
with  intent  to  sell,  exchange  or  deliver,  or  offer  or  ex- 
pose for  sale  in  any  city,  village  or  township  as  certified 
milk,  any  milk  which  has  not  been  certified  by  the  medi- 
cal milk  commission  of  that  city,  village  or  township,  or 


DAIRY    AND    POOD    LAWS. 


shall  violate  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall 
upon  conviction  thereof  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not  more  than  ninety 
days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  court. 

[Am.  by  Act  No.  196,  P.  A.,  1913.1 

201.     Sec.  12.     All  acts  or  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 
with  the  provisions  of  this  act  are  hereby  repealed. 


OLEOMARGARINE  IN  PUBLIC 
INSTITUTIONS. 

(Act  No.  45,  Public  Acts  of  1891.) 

AN  ACT  to  prohibit  the  use  of  oleomargarine,  butterine,  or  any 
other  substitute  for  butter  in  any  of  the  public  institutions 
of  this  State,  and  to  provide  the  punishment  therefor. 

202.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact.  That  the  use  of  oleomargarine,  butterine  or  any 
other  substitute  for  butter,  in  any  of  the  public  institu- 
tions of  this  state,  be  and  the  same  is  hereby  prohibited, 
except  in  the  penal  institutions  of  the  state. 

[Am.  by  Act  233,  P.  A.,  1913.] 

203.  Sec.  2.  Any  warden,  superintendent  or  other 
officer  of  any  such  institution,  who  shall  knowingly  vio- 
late the  provisions  of  section  one  of  this  act,  or  shall 
knowingly  permit  the  same  to  be  violated  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  every  violation 
shall  constitute  a  separate  offense  and  on  conviction 
thereof  shall   be   punished   by   a   fine  of  not  less   than 


100  STATE    OP    MICHIGAN. 

twenty-five,  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  together 
with  costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  of  the  county  in  which  said  institution  is 
situated,  not  exceeding  ninety  days,  or  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonmet,  at  the  discretion  of  the  court. 


MILK  BOTTLES. 

(Act  No.  257,  Public  Acts  of  1911.) 

AN  ACT  to  prohibit  drivers  of  milk  wagons  and  unauthorized 
persons  from  opening  milk  bottles,  or  in  any  way  interfering 
with  or  molesting  the  caps  or  covers  thereof  after  such  bottles 
shall  have  been  closed  at  the  creamery,  and  during  and  after 
the  process  of  delivery  to  patrons. 

204.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact ^  From  and  after  the  date  on  which  this  act  takes 
effect,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  driver  of  any  milk 
wagon,  or  any  distributor  of  milk,  or  any  person  what- 
soever, except  legally  authorized  milk  inspectors  and 
persons  to  whom  such  milk  is  delivered,  to  open  milk 
bottles  or  in  any  way  interfere  with  or  molest  the  caps 
or  covers  of  the  same  after  such  milk  bottles  shall  have 
been  closed  at  the  creamery,  or  during  the  process  of  the 
delivery  of  said  milk  or,  after  said  milk  shall  have  been 
delivered  in  due  course  of  business  and  in  the  ordinary 
manner. 

205.  Sec.  2.  Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  upon  conviction  thereof  in  a  court  of  com- 
petent jurisdiction  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not 
less  than  fifty  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dol- 
lars, or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  less 
than  thirty  days  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both 
such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  101 

FRUITS  AND  VEGECrABLteS^hJ! A 

(Act  No.  207,  Public  Acts,  1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  fraud  and  deception  in  the  sale  of  Michigan 
grown  fresh  fruits  and  vegetables,  and  to  provide  penalties 
for  violations  of  this  act. 

206.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  In  this  act,  unless  the  contents  otherwise  requires, 
the  term  "closed  package"  shall  be  construed  to  mean  a 
barrel,  box,  basket,  carrier  or  crate,  of  which  all  the  con- 
tents cannot  readily  be  seen  or  inspected  when  such 
package  is  prepared  for  market.  Fresh  fruits  or  vege- 
tables in  baskets  or  boxes,  packed  in  closed  or  open 
crates,  and  packages  covered  with  burlap,  tarlatan  or 
slat  covers  shall  come  within  the  meaning  of  the  term 
''closed  package."  None  of  the  provisions  of  this  act 
shall  apply  to  other  than  Michigan  grown  fruits  and 
vegetables. 

207.  Sec.  2.  Every  person  who,  by  himself  or  by  his 
agent  or  employe,  packs  or  repacks  fresh  fruits  or  vege- 
tables in  closed  packages  intended  for  sale  in  the  open 
market,  shall  cause  the  same  to  be  marked  in  a  plain 
and  indelible  manner,  as  follows: 

First,  With  his  full  name  and  address,  including  the 
name  of  the  state  where  such  fresh  fruits  and  vegetables 
are  packed,  before  such  fresh  fruits  or  vegetables  are  re- 
moved from  the  premises  of  the  packer  or  dealer; 

Second,  The  name  and  address  of  such  packer  or  dealer 
shall  be  printed  or  stamped  on  said  closed  packages  in 
letters  not  less  than  one-quarter  inch  in  height. 

208.  Sec.  3.  No  person  shall  sell  or  offer,  expose  or 
have  in  his  possession  for  sale,  in  the  open  market,  any 
fresh  fruits  or  vegetables  packed  in  a  closed  package  and 
intended  for  sale,  unless  such  package  is  marked  as  is  re- 
quired by  this  act. 

209.  Sec.  4.     No  person  shall  sell  or  offer,  expose  or 


102  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

have  h\  his  p'>sse>*8ioii  for  sale,  any  fresh  fruits  or  vege- 
tables packed  in  a  closed  or  open  package,  upon  which 
package  is  mark e(J  any  designation  which  represents 
such  fruit  as  '^No.  1,"  "Finest,"  "Best,"  "Extra  Good," 
"Fancy,"  "Selected,"  "Prime,"  "Standard,"  or  other  su- 
perior grade  or  quality,  unless  such  fruit  or  vegetables 
consist  of  well  grown  specimens,  sound,  of  nearly  uni- 
form size,  normal  shape,  good  color,  for  the  variety,  and 
not  less  than  ninety  per  cent  free  from  injurious  or  dis- 
figuring bruises,  diseases,  insect  injuries  or  other  de- 
fects, natural  deterioration  and  decay  in  transit  or  stor- 
age excepted. 

210.  Sec.  5.  No  person  shall  sell  or  offer,  expose  or 
have  in  his  possession  for  sale,  any  fresh  fruits  or  vege- 
tables packed  in  any  package  in  which  the  faced  or 
shown  surface  gives  a  false  representation  of  the  con- 
tents of  such  package,  and  it  shall  be  considered  a  false 
representation  when  more  than  twenty  per  cent  of  such 
fresh  fruits  or  vegetables  are  substantially  smaller  in 
size  than  or  inferior  in  grade  to,  or  different  in  variety 
from,  the  faced  or  shown  surface  of  such  package,  natural 
deterioration  and  decay  in  transit  or  storage,  excepted. 

211.  Sec.  6.  Every  person  who,  by  himself,  his  agent 
or  employe,  knowingly  violates  any  of  the  provisions 
of  this  act  shall  for  each  such  offense,  be  deemed  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be 
punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding  ten  dollars,  or  by  im- 
prisonment in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  not  exceeding 
thirty  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  108 


TABLE  GRAPES. 

(Act  No.   107,   Public  Acts,   1913.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  packing  for  shipment  and  sale  of  table 
grapes,   and   providing   penalties   for   violation    thereof. 

212.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  grapes  that  are  not  ripe,  or  are  the  fruit  of 
unhealthy  vines,  or  are  for  any  reason  unhealthy  or  in 
a  state  of  decay  shall  be  packed  for  shipment  by  any 
grower,  packer  or  shipper  in  any  package  or  basket  of 
less  than  sixteen  pounds  capacity. 

218.  Sec.  2.  Any  person  or  persons  found  guilty  of 
violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act,  in  any  court 
of  competent  jurisdiction,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor  and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  ten  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or 
by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  less  than  ten 
days  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

214.  Sec.  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  state  dairy 
and  food  commissioner,  his  deputies  and  assistants,  to 
enforce  the  provisions  of  this  act. 


COLLECTION   OF  REGISTRATION  FEES 
BY  CIVIL  SUIT. 

Public  Act  No.  37,  Session  Laws  1913. 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  the  collection  of  registration,  license 
and  other  fees  due  the  state  dairy  and  food  department,  by 
means  of  a  civil  suit  in  the  state  courts. 

215.     Section  1.    The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,   Whenever   any   corporation,    firm   or   person   en- 


104  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

gaged  as  a  dealer,  manufacturer,  storer  or  transporter 
of  any  food  or  beverage  product  for  man  or  animal, 
doing  business  within  the  state  shall  for  thirty  days 
after  the  same  becomes  due  refuse  or  neglect  to  pay  any 
registration  or  license  fee  which  the  laws  of  Michigan  re- 
quire said  corporation,  firm  or  person  to  pay  to  the 
state  dairy  and  food  department,  the  state  dairy  and 
food  commissioner  may  bring  a  civil  suit  in  the  name  of 
the  people  of  the  state  of  Michigan  for  the  use  and  bene- 
fit of  the  state  dairy  and  food  department  for  the  re- 
covery of  said  registration  or  license  fee. 

216.  Sec.  2.  Said  suit  may  be  commenced  in  the  cir- 
cuit court  for  the  county  of  Ingham  or  in  the  circuit 
court  of  the  county  where  the  principal  business  ofSce  of 
such  defendant  corporation,  firm  or  person  shall  be  lo- 
cated and  shall  be  prosecuted  in  like  manner  as  in  civil 
suits  between  individuals,  and  judgment  and  execution 
may  follow  in  like  manner  and  costs  may  be  recovered  to 
be  taxed  as  in  other  civil  cases,  and  all  moneys  recovered 
shall  be  paid  into  the  state  treasury  for  the  use  and 
benefit  of  the  state  dairy  and  food  department:  Pro- 
vided, That  no  suit  as  authorized  by  this  act,  shall  be 
commenced  until  thirty  days  after  the  defendant  in  such 
suit  has  been  duly  notified  of  his  or  her  delinquency, 
either  personally  or  by  registered  letter. 

217.  Sec.  3.  All  expenses  incurred  by  the  state  dairy 
and  food  commissioner  under  this  act  shall  be  defrayed 
by  the  state  dairy  and  food  department  out  of  its  an- 
nual appropriation. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  105 


CARBONATED  BEVERAGES,  SYRUPS, 
EXTRACTS  AND  SOFT  DRINKS. 

(Act  No.  288,  P.  A.,  1915.) 

AN  ACT  to  regulate  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  carbonated 
beverages,  syrups,  extracts  and  soft  drinks  within  the  State 
and  prescribe  penalties  for  violation  thereof. 

218.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  manufacture 
and  bottle  for  sale  any  carbonated  beverages,  soda  water, 
grape  juice,  cider,  mineral  water,  or  other  soft  drink 
within  this  State  without  having  first  filed  with  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  an  application  for  a 
license,  accompanied  with  a  fee  of  ten  dollars;  upon 
receipt  of  which  application  the  Dairy  and  Food  Com- 
missioner shall  issue  to  the  person,  firm  or  corporation 
making  such  application,  a  license  to  manufacture  car- 
bonated beverages,  soda  waters,  grape  juice,  cider,  min- 
eral waters  or  other  soft  drinks  as  hereinafter  provided. 
Said  license  shall  run  from  one  year  from  the  date  of  the 
application,  unless  sooner  revoked  as  herein  provided 
and  shall  be  renewed  annually  thereafter. 

219.  Sec.  2.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  sell, 
offer  for  sale  or  have  in  their  possession  with  intent  to 
sell,  any  soda  water  syrup  or  extract,  soft  drink  syrup, 
or  extract  bearing  a  distinguishing  name  or  trade  mark, 
without  first  registering  the  name  or  brand  of  the  syrup 
or  extract,  and  the  name  and  address  of  the  manufac- 
turer thereof,  with  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner. 
He  or  they  shall  also  pay  into  the  State  Treasury  at  the 
time  of  making  such  registration  a  license  fee  of  five  dol- 
lars for  each  and  every  brand  of  said  syrup  or  extract 
that  is  sold  or  offered  for  sale.  Said  registration  shall  be 
renewed  annually:  Provided,  That  whenever  any  manu- 
facturer, agent  or  seller  shall  have  paid  this  fee,  his  agent 


106  STATE    OP   MICHIGAN. 

or  dealer  using  the  same  shall  not  be  required  to  do  so. 
All  moneys  collected  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  paid  into 
the  State  Treasury.  The  provisions  of  this  section  shall 
not  apply  to  local  sellers  of  soda  water,  grape  juice, 
cider,  or  other  carbonated  beverages,  as  to  syrups  and  ex- 
tracts made  by  themselves  for  their  own  use  exclusively. 
A  manufacturer,  jobber  or  dealer  in  every  syrup,  extract 
or  soft  drink  required  to  be  licensed  under  this  section, 
shall,  upon  making  application  for  such  license,  file  with 
the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  a  sample  of  said 
syrup,  extract  or  soft  drink  for  analysis,  and  said  license 
shall  not  be  granted  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner unless  he  shall  determine  that  said  syrup,  extract 
or  soft  drink  is  free  from  all  harmful  drugs  and  other 
ingredients  that  are  injurious  to  health. 

220.  Sec.  3.  The  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner 
shall  have  the  power  to  revoke  any  license  issued  under 
the  provisions  of  this  act,  whenever  it  is  determined  by 
himself  or  any  of  his  deputies,  chemists  or  other  properly 
qualified  official  that  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act 
have  been  violated.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation 
whose  license  has  been  so  revoked  shall  discontinue  the 
manufacture  of  bottle  carbonated  beverages,  soda  waters, 
grape  juice,  cider  or  other  mineral  waters  until  the  pro- 
visions of  this  act  have  been  complied  with  and  a  new 
license  issued.  He  may  revoke  such  license  temporarily 
until  there  is  a  compliance  with  such  conditions  as  he 
may  prescribe,  or  permanently  for  the  unexpired  period 
of  such  license. 

221.  Sec.  4.  Before  revoking  any  license,  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  shall  give  written  notice  to  the 
licensee  affected,  stating  that  he  contemplates  the  revo- 
cation of  the  same  and  giving  his  reasons  therefor. 
Said  notice  shall  appoint  a  time  of  hearing  before  said 
commissioner  and  shall  be  mailed  by  registered  mail  to 
the  licensee.  On  the  day  of  hearing,  the  licensee  may 
present  such  evidence  to  the  commissioner  as  he  deems 
fit,  and  after  hearing  all  the  testimony,  the  commissioner 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  107 

shall  decide  the  question  in  such  manner  as  to  him  ap- 
pears just  and  right. 

222.  Sec.  5.  Any  licensee  who  feels  aggrieved  at  the 
decision  of  the  commissioner,  may  appeal  from  said  de- 
cision within  ten  days  by  writ  of  ceriorari  to  the  circuit 
court  of  the  county  where  licensee  resides  and  issue  shall 
be  framed  in  said  court  and  a  trial  had  and  its  decision 
shall  be  final. 

228.  Sec.  6.  For  the  purpose  of  this  act  a  bottled 
carbonated  beverage,  soda  water,  grape  juice,  cider  or 
other  soft  drink,  except  pure  fruit  juices,  shall  consist  of 
a  beverage  made  from  a  pure  cane  or  beet  sugar  syrup, 
containing  pure  flavoring  materials,  with  or  without 
added  fruit  acid,  with  or  without  added  color  and  shall 
contain  in  the  finished  product  not  less  than  eight  per 
cent  sugar:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall 
prohibit  the  use  of  any  other  harmless  ingredient  in  the 
manufacture  of  carbonated  beverages:  And  Provided 
further,  That  whenever  artificial  coal  tar  colors  are  used 
nothing  but  the  certified  colors  as  approved  by  the  fed- 
eral government  are  permissible.  The  provisions  of  this 
section  shall  not  apply  to  retailers  who  do  not  bottle 
soda  water  or  other  soft  drinks,  or  to  beverages  made  in 
imitation  of  beer,  bitter  drinks  or  other  similar  drinks. 
And  all  bottled  carbonated  beverages  or  other  soft  drinks 
not  in  compliance  with  the  standards  established  by  this 
act,  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated. 

224.  Sec.  7.  Whenever  artificial  colors  or  flavors  are 
used  in  the  manufacture  of  carbonated  beverages,  soda 
waters,  grape  juice,  cider,  mineral  waters  or  other  soft 
drinks  the  bottle  or  other  container  shall  be  distinctly 
labeled  "Artificially  colored  and  flavored.''  All  ciders, 
fruit  ades,  fruit  juices  or  other  similar  drinks  that  are 
made  in  imitation  of  the  natural  product  shall  be  prop- 
erly and  distinctly  labeled  with  the  word  "Imitation'' 
followed  by  the  name  of  the  beverage.  All  beverages  sold 
in  bulk;  or  from  open  receptacles  that  contain  artificial 
coloring  or  artificial  flavors  of  any  character,  shall  be  so 
labeled,  said  labels  to  be  prominentl}^  displayed  on  all 


108  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

stands,  booths,  or  other  places  where  said  beverages  are 
sold  or  dispensed.  Labels  for  this  purpose  shall  not  be 
less  than  four  inches  wide  and  ten  inches  long,  and  shall 
contain  the  following: 

'^'Artificially  colored,  artificially  flavored,"  or  '^Artifi- 
cially  colored,  imitation  flavor."  When  said  beverages 
contain  artificial  color  and  natural  fruit  flavor,  said 
labels  shall  indicate  the  presence  of  the  artificial  coloring 
as  follows:  "Artificially  colored."  When  said  bever- 
ages contain  artificial  flavors  and  no  artificial  coloring, 
they  shall  be  labeled  as  follows:  "Artificial  flavor,"  or 
"Imitation flavor." 

225.  Sec.  8.  All  buildings,  stores,  factories,  or  other 
places  where  carbonated  beverages,  soda  waters,  grape 
juice,  cider,  mineral  waters  or  other  soft  drinks  are 
manufactured  or  bottled  shall  be  well  lighted  and  venti- 
lated and  shall  be  kept  at  all  times  in  a  sanitary  condi- 
tion. All  machines,  bottles,  jars  or  other  utensils  used 
in  the  manufacture  of  carbonated  beverages,  soda  water, 
mineral  waters  or  other  soft  drinks  shall  be  kept  at  all 
times  in  a  clean  and  sanitary  place  and  in  a  sanitary 
condition. 

226.  Sec.  9.  All  bottles  used  in  the  manufacture  of 
carbonated  beverages,  soda  waters,  grape  juice,  cider, 
carbonated  mineral  waters  or  any  other  soft  drink,  be- 
fore being  filled  shall  be  sterilized  by  soaking  in  a  hot 
caustic  solution  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  twenty 
degrees  Fahrenheit  that  shall  contain  not  less  than  five 
per  cent  caustic  or  alkali,  expressed  in  terms  of  sodium 
hydrate,  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  five  minutes,  then 
thoroughly  rinsed  in  pure  water  until  free  from  alkali; 
or  by  any  other  suitable  process  that  will  properly 
sterilize  the  bottles. 

227.  Sec.  10.  No  bottles  shall  be  used  in  the  manu- 
facture of  carbonated  beverages,  soda  waters,  grape 
juice,  cider,  mineral  waters  or  other  soft  drinks,  in  which 
the  metal  or  rubber  part  of  the  stopper  comes  in  contact 
with  the  beverage.  The  provisions  of  this  section  shall 
not  apply  to  carbonated  water  put  up  in  "siphons." 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  109 


228.  Sec.  11.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  who 
shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things  prohibited,  or  neglect 
or  refuse  to  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things  required  by  this 
act  or  in  any  way  violate  any  of  its  provisions,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  of  not  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not  more 
than  ninety  days  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment 
in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

229.  Sec.  12.  The  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner 
shall  be  charged  with  the  enforcement  of  the  provisions 

of  this  act.  -^WW^ 

STATE  B.RAND  FOR  BUTTER. 

(Act  No.  53,  P.  A.,  1915.) 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  a  state  brand  for  Michigan  butter,  for  the 
purpose  of  insuring  a  higher  standard  of  excellence  and  quality, 
a  more  uniform  butter  market,  and  to  insure  a  more  healthful 
product  for  consumption  at  home  and  abroad,  and  to  regulate 
the  use  of  such  mark  or  brand. 

230.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact,  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  manufacturing 
butter  in  this  state  may  use  the  brand,  mark  or  label 
therefor  as  provided  in  this  act. 

231.  Sec.  2.  Said  trade  mark  or  brand  and  its  use 
and  regulation  shall  be  in  charge  of  and  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  commission  of  three  members  consisting  of  the 
state  dairy  and  food  commissioner,  the  president  of  the 
Michigan  State  Dairymen's  Association  and  the  presi- 
dent of  the  Michigan  State  Butter  Makers'  Association. 

232.  Sec.  3.  The  state  trade  mark  or  brand  shall  be 
controlled,  used,  manufactured  and  issued  under  such 
rules  and  regulations  as  may  be  found  necessary  from 
time  to  time  by  the  said  commission.  Said  commission 
or  commissioners  shall  have  power  to  make  such  changes 


110  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

in  the  rules  and  regulations  for  the  use  of  said  trade 
mark  or  brands  as  it  may  deem  necessary  from  time  to 
time. 

233.  See.  4.  The  rules  governing  the  use  of  such  trade 
mark  or  brand  shall  be  published  by  and  through  bulle- 
tins issued  by  the  state  dairy  and  food  department.  Such 
labels,  stamps  or  other  means  of  imprinting  such  trade 
mark  or  brand  upon  the  manufactured  product  or  the 
receptacles  containing  the  same,  shall  be  furnished  to 
those  entitled  to  the  use  thereof  by  the  state  dairy  and 
food  department. 

234.  Sec.  5.  The  said  commission  is  hereby  directed 
and  authorized  to  secure  a  copy-right  under  the  laws  of 
the  United  States  for  trade  marks  or  brands,  and  copy- 
rights for  such  trade  mark  or  brand  of  butter.  Said 
trade  mark,  brand,  or  label  shall  be  of  such  size  and  design 
as  the  said  commission  shall  designate  and  shall  contain 
in  prominent  letters,  the  words,  ''Michigan  butter,  Li- 
cense Number    ,"  and  the  words,   "State 

Butter  Control." 

235.  Sec.  6.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  desiring 
to  use  the  brand  or  label  provided  for  in  this  act  in  the 
manufacture  or  sale  of  butter  shall  make  written  applica- 
tion for  a  license  therefor  to  the  dairy  and  food  commis- 
sioner, which  application  shall  describe  by  location  and 
name  the  creamery  or  factory  in  which  such  butter  is  to 
be  manufactured,  and  give  such  other  information  as  may 
be  required.  A  license  shall  be  granted  to  such  person, 
firm  or  corporation  to  use  such  brand  or  label  at  the  fac- 
tory described  in  the  application,  if  on  investigation  by 
the  dairy  and  food  commissioner,  his  deputy  or  duly 
authorized  assistants,  it  appears  that  all  the  provisions 
of  this  act  and  the  rules  and  regulations  by  the  com- 
mission have  been  complied  with.  Such  license  shall 
state  that  the  brand  or  label  provided  for  by  the  said 
commission  may  be  used  in  connection  with  the  manu- 
facture or  sale  of  butter  from  the  factory  described  in 
such  license.  Such  factories  so  described  shall  be  given 
the  same  number  as  the  serial  number  of  the  license. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  Ill 


236.  Sec.  7.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  use 
in  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  butter  such  brand  or  label 
without  having  first  obtained  a  license  therefor  as  pro- 
vided in  this  act.  Such  license  so  granted  may  be  revoked 
by  the  said  commissioner  if  any  of  the  conditions  of  this 
act  or  of  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  commission  are 
not  complied  with.  Such  license  so  granted  shall  not  be 
transferable. 

237.  Sec.  8.  The  use  of  any  brand  or  mark  for  butter 
or  butter  substitute  resembling  the  above  brand  or  so 
near  like  it  that  it  can  be  confounded  with  it,  is  pro- 
hibited. 

238.  Sec.  9.  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  violat- 
ing any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  deemed 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  on  conviction  thereof  shall 
be  fined  not  more  than  one  hundred  dollars  or  im- 
prisoned in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than  thirty  days. 


STANDARD  MILK  BOTTLES. 

(Act  No.  154,  P.  A.,  1915.) 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  fraud  and  deception  in  the  sale  of  milk  and 
cream,  providing  standard  milk  bottles  and  for  the  sealing 
thereof. 

239.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact.  On  and  after  January  one,  nineteen  hundred  six- 
teen, bottles  used  for  the  sale  of  milk  and  cream  in  this 
state  shall  be  of  the  capacity  of  half  gallon,  three  pints, 
one  quart,  one  pint,  ten  ounce,  half  pint,  one  gill  filled 
full  to  the  bottom  of  the  lip.  The  following  variations  on 
individual  bottles  or  jars  may  be  allowed:  Six  drams 
above  and  six  drams  below  on  the  half  gallon;  five  drams 
above  and  five  drams  below  on  the  three-pint;  four  drams 
above  and  four  drams  below  on  the  quart;  three  drams 


112  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

above  and  three  drams  below  on  the  pint;  two  and  one- 
half  drams  above  and  two  and  one-half  drams  below  on 
the  ten  ounce ;  two  drams  above  and  two  drams  below  on 
the  half  pint;  two  drams  above  and  two  drams  below  on 
the  gill.  But  the  average  contents  of  not  less  than  twen- 
ty-five bottles  selected  at  random  from  at  least  four  times 
the  number  tested  must  not  be  in  error  by  more  than  one- 
quarter  of  the  tolerances :  One  and  five-tenths  drams  above 
and  one  and  five-tenths  drams  below  on  the  half  gallon; 
one  and  twenty-five  hundredths  drams  above  and  one  and 
twenty-five  hundredths  drams  below  on  the  three  pint ;  one 
dram  above  and  one  dram  below  on  the  quart ;  seventy-five 
hundredths  drams  above  and  seventy-five  hundredths 
drams  below  on  the  pint ;  seventy-five  hundredths  drams 
above  and  seventy-five  hundredths  drams  below  on  the 
ten  ounce;  five-tenths  drams  above  and  fivei-tenths  drams 
below  on  the  half  pint ;  five- tenths  drams  above  and  five- 
tenths  drams  below  on  the  gill.  Bottles  or  jars  used 
for  the  sale  of  milk  shall  have  clearly  blown  or  otherwise 
permanently  marked  in  the  side  of  the  bottle,  the  capac- 
ity of  the  bottle  and  the  word  "sealed"  and  in  the  side 
or  bottom  of  the  bottle  the  name,  initials  or  trademark 
of  the  manufacturer  and  designating  number,  which 
designating  number  shall  be  different  for  each  manu- 
facturer and  may  be  used  in  identifying  the  bottles. 
The  designating  number  shall  be  furnished  by  the  state 
superintendent  of  weights  and  measures  upon  application 
by  the  manufacturer,  and  upon  filing  by  the  manufac- 
turer of  a  bond  in  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  with 
sureties  to  be  approved  by  the  attorney  general,  condi- 
tioned upon  their  performance  of  the  requirements  of 
this  section.  A  record  of  the  bonds  furnished,  the  desig- 
nating numbeirs,  and  to  whom  furnished,  shall  be  kept  in 
the  ofQce  of  the  superintendent  of  weights  and  measures. 
240.  Sec.  2.  On  and  after  January  one,  nineteen  hun- 
dred sixteen,  any  manufacturer  who  seills  milk  or  cream 
bottles  to  be  used  in  this  state,  which  do  not  comply 
as  to  size  and  markings  with  the  provisions  of  this  act, 
shall  suffer  the  penalty  of  five  hundred  dollars,  to  be  re- 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  113 

(overed  by  the  attorney  general  in  an  action  against  the 
offender's  bondsmen,  to  be  brought  in  the  name  of  the 
people  of  the  statev  Any  dealer  who  uses,  for  the  pnr- 
]>ose  of  selling  milk  or  cream,  jars  or  bottles  purchased 
nfter  this  law  takes  effect,  which  do  not  comply  with  the 
requirements  of  this  act  as  to  markings  and  capacity, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  using  false  or  insufficient 
measure. 

241.  Sec.  3.  Sealers  of  weights  and  measures  are  not 
required  to  seal  bottles  or  jars  for  milk  or  cream  marked 
as  in  this  act  provided,  but  they  shall  from  time  to  time 
make  tests  on  individual  bottles  used  by  the  various 
firms  in  the  territory  over  which  they  have  jurisdiction, 
in  order  to  ascertain  whether  the  above  provisions  are 
being  complied  with,  and  they  shall  report  violations 
found  immediately  to  the  superintendent  of  weights  and 
measures.  Any  dealer  who  knowingly  uses  for  the  pur- 
pose of  selling  milk  or  cream,  jars  or  bottles  purchased 
after  this  law  takes  effect,  which  do  not  comply  with  this 
act  as  to  marking  the  capacity,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor and  be  punished  accordingly. 


PASTEURIZATION. 

(Act  No.  93,  P.  A.,  1915.) 

AN  ACT  to  provide  for  pasteurizing  the  by-products  of  cheese 
factories,  creameries,  skimming  stations  and  other  places 
where  milk  is  received  and  distributed. 

242.  Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan 
enact.  Every  owner,  operator  or  manager  of  a  cheese  fac- 
tory, creamery,  skimming  station  or  other  place  where 
milk  is  received  and  the  by-products  distributed,  shall,  be- 
fore returning  to  or  delivering  to  any  person  or  persons 
15 


114  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

any  skim  milk,  whey,  buttermilk,  or  other  milk  by-prod- 
ucts to  be  used  for  feeding  purposes  for  farm  animals, 
cause  such  skim  milk,  whey,  buttermilk,  or  other  milk  by- 
products to  be  thoroughly  pasteurized  by  heating  the  same 
to  one  hundred  forty-five  degrees  Fahremheit  and  holding 
at  that  temperature  for  not  less  than  thirty  minutes  or 
to  one  hundred  eighty-five  degrees  without  holding: 
Provided,  That  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  apply 
to  cheese  factories  or  creameries  that  pasteurize  the  milk 
or  cream  prior  to  manufacture. 

243.  Sec.  2.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  on 
conviction  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than 
one  hundred  dollars,  or  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail 
for  not  exceeding  ninety  days,  or  both,  in  the  discretion 
of  the  court. 


OFFENSES  AGAINST  THE  PUBLIC  HEALTH. 

(C.  L.  11404)  Section  1.  If  any  person  shall  knowingly 
sell  any  kind  of  diseased,  corrupted  or  unwholesome  provisions, 
whether  for  meat  or  drink,  without  making  the  same  fully 
known  to  the  buyer,  he  shall  be  punished  by  imprisonment  in 
the  county  jail  not  more  than  six  months,  or  by  fine  not  ex- 
ceeding two  hundred  dollars. 

(C.  L.  11405)  Section  2.  If  any  person  shall  fraudulently 
adulterate,  for  the  purpose  of  sale,  any  substance  intended  for 
food,  or  any  wine,  spirits,  malt  liquor,  or  other  liquor  intended 
for  drinking,  he  shall  be  punished  by  imprisonment  in  the 
county  jail  not  more  than  one  year,  or  by  fine  not  exceeding 
three  hundred  dollars,  and  the  article  so  adulterated  shall  be 
forfeited  and  destroyed. 

(C.  L.  11406)  Section  3.  If  any  person  shall  fraudulently 
adulterate,  for  the  purpose  of  sale,  any  drug  or  medicine,  in 
such  manner  as  to  render  the  same  injurious  to  health,  he  shall 
be  punished  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not  more  than 
one  year,  or  by  fine  not  exceeding  four  hundred  dollars,  and  such 
adulterated  drugs  and  medicines  shall  be  forfeited  and  destroyed. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  116 

MICHIGAN  SUPREME  COURT. 

DECISIONS  RHLATIVE  TO  DAIRY  AND  FOOD  LAWS. 


► 


PEOPLE    V.    SNOWBERGER. 
(Opinion  filed  May  25,  1897.) 

Adulteration  of  Food — Statutory  Offenses — Intent — Police  Power. 

1.  It  is  competent  for  the  legislature  under  the  police  power, 
to  provide  for  the  protection  of  the  public  health  by  mak- 
ing it  an  offense  punishable  by  fine  and  imprisonment  to 
sell  adulterated  food  or  drink,  irrespective  of  the  seller's 
knowledge  of  the  adulteration. 

2.  Act  No.  193,  Public  Acts  1895,  prohibits  the  manufacture  or 
sale  of  adulterated  articles  of  food  or  drink,  and  prescribes 
what  shall  be  deemed  adulteration  within  the  meaning  of 
the  act.  Section  8  forbids  any  person  from  knowingly  offer- 
ing for  sale  cheese  which  is  falsely  labeled;  this  being  the 
only  case  in  which  knowledge  is  expressly  made  an  element 
of  an  offense  designated  by  such  statute.  Held,  that  proof 
of  guilty  knowledge  or  intent  is  not  essential  to  the  convic- 
tion of  one  who  sells  adulterated  food. 

(113  Mich.  86.) 

Exceptions  before  judgment  from  Monroe;  Kinne,  J. 

V 

Michael  Snowberger  was  convicted  of  selling  adulterated  food, 
in  violation  of  Act  No.  193,  Public  Acts  of  1895. 
Conviction  aflBrmed. 

William  Look  and  Ira  G.  Humphrey,  for  appellant. 

Bowen,  Douglas  &  Whiting,  of  counsel. 

Willis   Baldwin,   Prosecuting  Attorney,   for  the    people. 

Long,  C.  J.:  Respondent  was  convicted  under  an  information 
charging  that:  "On  the  19th  day  of  April,  A.  D.,  1897,  at  the 
city   of   Monroe,   and   in   the   county   aforesaid,   Michael    Snow- 


116  STATE    OP    MICHIGAN. 

berger  did  offer  for  sale,  and  sell,  to  Carl  Franke,  an  adulter- 
ated article  of  food,  to  wit:  A  quantity  of  mustard,  to  wit,  a 
quarter  of  a  pound,  colored  and  adulterated  with  tumeric, 
wliereby  the  said  mustard,  as  an  article  of  food,  was  damaged 
and  its  inferiority  concealed  and  whereby  it  was  made  to  ap- 
pear of  better  and  of  greater  value  than  it  really  was,  th«  same 
not  being  a  mixture  or  compound  recognized  as  ordinary  articles 
or  ingredients  of  articles  of  food;  contrary  to  the  form  of  the 
statute  in  such  case  made  and  provided,"  etc. 

The  information  was  filed  under  Act  No.  193,  Public  Acts 
1895,  entitled  "An  act  to  prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration, 
fraud  and  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  articles  of 
food   and    drink."     The   act   provides: 

Section  1.  "No  person  shall  within  this  State  manufacture 
for  sale,  offer  for  sale,  or  sell  any  article  of  food  which  is  adul- 
terated within  the  meaning  of  this  act," 

Section  2.  "The  term  food  as  used  herein,  shall  include  all 
articles  used  for  food  or  drink,  or  intended  to  be  eaten  or  drunk 
by  man,  whether  simple,  mixed  or  compound." 

Section  3.  "An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated  with- 
in the  meaning  of  this  act:  One,  If  any  substance  or  substances 
have  been  mixed  with  it  so  as  to  lower  or  depreciate  or  injuri- 
ously affect  its  quality,  strength  or  purity;  Two,  If  any  inferior 
or  cheaper  substance  or  substances  have  been  substituted  wholly 
or  in  part  for  it;  Three,  if  any  valuable  or  necessary  constitu- 
ent or  ingredient  has  been  wholly  or  in  part  abstracted  from 
it;  Four,  If  it  is  sold  under  the  name  of  another  article;  Five, 
If  it  consists  wholly  or  in  part  of  a  diseased,  decomposed,  putrid, 
infected,  tainted  or  rotten  animal  or  vegetable  substance  or  arti- 
cle, whether  manufactured  or  not,  or  in  case  of  milk,  if  it  is  the 
product  of  a  diseased  animal;  Six,  If  it  is  colored,  coated,  polished 
or  powdered,  whereby  damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed,  or  if 
by  any  means  it  is  made  to  appear  better  or  of  greater  value 
than  it  really  is;  Seven,  If  it  contains  an  added  substance  or 
ingredient  which  is  poisonous  or  injurious  to  health:  Provided, 
That  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  apply  to  mixtures  or 
compounds  recognized  as  ordinary  articles  or  ingredients  of 
articles  of  food,  if  each  and  every  package  sold  or  offered  for  sale 
be  distinctly  labeled  as  mixtures  or  compounds,  and  are  not  in- 
jurious to  health." 

Section  19  makes  any  violation  of  the  act  a  misdemeanor  and 
provides  a  penalty  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  $100  nor  mor|e 
than   $500,   or   by  imprisonment   in   the   county  jail,  etc. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  117 

On  the  trial  respondent  admitted,  that  on  the  19th  day  of 
April,  1897,  he,  at  the  city  of  Monroe,  this  State,  offered  for 
sale  and  did  sell  to  Carl  Franke  a  quantity  of  mustard,  to  wit, 
a  quarter  of  a  pound  which  was  aftewards  found  upon  a  chemi- 
cal examination  to  be  colored  and  adulterated  with  tumeric, 
whereby  the  said  mustard  as  an  article  of  food  was  damaged 
and  its  inferiority  concealed,  and  it  was  thereby  made  to  ap- 
pear of  greater  and  better  value  than  it  really  was;  the  same 
not  being  a  mixture  or  compound  recognized  as  an  ordinary 
article  or   ingredient   of  articles  of  food. 

But  he  claimed  that  said  article  of  mustard,  so  sold  was  pur- 
chased by  him  as  a  pure  article  in  good  faith,  and  that  he  be- 
lieved at  the  time  of  the  purchase  by  him  and  also  at  the  time 
of  the  sale  to  the  said  Franke,  that  the  same  was  pure  mus- 
tard, free  from  any  coloring  and  adulteration  with  tumeric 
or  any  other  coloring  or  adulterant,  and  that  no  inferiority  was 
concealed  whereby  it  was  made  to  appear  of  greater  or  better 
value  than  it  really  was;  that  at  the  time  he  purchased  the  same 
he  asked  for  pure  mustard  and  that  the  same  was  warranted 
to  him  as  pure;  that  he  did  not  make  or  cause  to  have  made  a 
chemical  examination  of  the  same  and  did  not  inform  himself 
or  endeavor  to  ascertain  the  methods  of  determining  pure  from 
impure  mustards,  but  relied  upon  the  representations  of  his 
vender  and  the  appearance  of  the  article  to  the  eye;  and  that 
he   did  not   intend  to  violate   the   law. 

From   such   conviction    respondent  appeals. 

•It  is  the  contention  of  counsel  for  respondent  that  it  was  the 
intent  of  the  legislature  to  provide  by  the  act  that  no  person 
should  be  convicted  and  punished  for  selling  adulterated  food 
or  drink  without  showing  that  he  knew  the  same  to  be  adul- 
terated; that  the  information  does  not  charge  such  knowledge, 
and  the  proofs  disclosed  that  respondent  acted  in  good  faith  and 
in  the  belief  that  the  article  sold  was  pure  and  unadulterated. 

The  act  cannot  be  so  construed.  The  offense  under  the  act 
consists  in  selling  an  article  intended  to  be  eaten  or  drunk 
which  is  adulterated.  Section  8  of  the  acts  shows  conclusively 
that  the  legislature  did  not  intend  to  make  criminal  intent  or 
guilty  knowledge  a   necessary  ingredient  of  the  offense.     As  a 


118  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

rule  there  can  be  no  crime  without  a  criminal  intent;  but  this 
rule   is   not  universal. 

In  People  v,  Roby,  52  Mich.  577  (50  Am.  Rep.  270),  the  re- 
spondent was  convicted  of  the  offense  under  the  statute  of  keep- 
ing his  saloon  open  on  Sunday.  It  was  there  said:  "It  is  con- 
tended that  to  constitute  an  offense  under  the  section  referred 
to  (How.  Stat,  Sec.  2274),  there  must  be  some  evidence  tending 
to  show  an  intent  on  the  part  of  the  respondent  to  violate  it. 
*  *  *  *  The  section  under  which  Roby  is  prosecuted  makes 
the  crime  consist,  not  in  the  affirmative  act  of  any  person,  but 
in  the  negative  conduct  of  failing  to  keep  the  saloon  closed.  As 
a  rule  there  can  be  no  crime  without  a  criminal  intent;  but  this 
is  not  by  any  means  a  universal  rule.  One  may  be  guilty  of 
the  high  crime  of  manslaughter  when  his  only  fault  is  gross 
negligence,  and  there  are  many  other  cases  where  mere  neglect 
may  be  highly  criminal.  Many  statutes  which  are  in  the  nature 
of  police  regulations,  as  this  is,  impose  criminal  penalties  irre- 
spective of  any  intent  to  violate  them;  the  purpose  being  to 
require  a  degree  of  diligence  for  the  protection  of  the  public 
which  shall  render  violation  impossible." 

Many  cases  are  cited  in  that  case  where  convictions  were  sus- 
tained although  the  element  of  guilty  knowledge  was  lacking. 
Thus  in  Massachusetts  a  person  may  be  convicted  of  the  crime 
of  selling  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  though  he  did  not 
know. it  to  be  intoxicating. 

Com.  V.  Boynton,  2  Allen,  160. 

And  of  the  offense  of  selling  adulterated  milk,  though  ignor- 
ant of   its   adulteration. 

Com.  V.  Farren,  9  Allen,  489. 
Com.  V.  Nichols,  10  Allen,  199. 
Com.  V.  Waite,  11  Allen,  264. 
Com.  V.  Smith,  103  Mass.  444. 

In  Missouri  a  magistrate  may  be  liable  to  the  penalty  for 
performing  the  marriage  ceremony  for  minors  without  consent 
of  parents  or  guardians,  though  he  may  suppose  them  to  be  of 
the  proper  age. 

Beckham  v.  Nacke,  56  Mo.,  546. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  119 

Where  the  killing  and  sale  of  a  calf  under  a  specified  age  Is 
prohibited  there  may  be  a  conviction  though  the  party  was 
ignorant  of  the  animal's  age. 

Com.  V.  Raymond,  97  Mass.,  567. 

In  People  v.  Welsh,  71  Mich.  548,  this  court  in  speaking  of 
People  V.  Roby,  supra,  said:  "When  a  statute  does  not  make 
intent  an  element  of  the  offense,  but  commands  an  act  to  be 
done  or  omitted  which  in  the  absence  of  the  statute  might  have 
been  done  or  omitted  without  culpability,  ignorance  of  the  fact 
or  state  of  things  contemplated  by  the  statute  will  not  excuse 
its   violation;"    citing: 

State  V.  Hartfield,  24  Wis.,  60. 

In  the  late  case  in  this  court  of  Walcott  v.  Judge  of  Superior 
Court,  112  Mich.  311,  the  relator,  as  prosecuting  attorney  of 
the  county,  filed  an  information  against  one  Fred  Saunders, 
charging  him  with  being  engaged  in  selling  liquor  without  giv- 
ing the  bond  required  by  the  statute.  The  bond  was  fair  upon 
its  face,  but  one  of  the  sureties,  it  appears  was  disqualified 
under  section  2282dl,  3  How.  Stat.  The  information  did  not 
allege  that  respondent  had  knowledge  of  this  defect  in  the 
bond.  The  information  was  quashed  by  the  court  below,  and 
the  relator  asked  the  aid  of  mandamus  to  compel  the  respond- 
ent to  reinstate  the  case.  It  was  said  by  this  court  in  the 
majority  opinion:  "It  was  the  intention  of  the  legislature  to 
make  the  execution  and  delivery  of  the  prescribed  bond  a  con- 
dition precedent  to  sale,  and  to  require  the  person  desiring  to 
engage  in  the  business  mentioned  to  assume  the  responsibility 
of  knowing  that  the  bond  when  presented  complies  in  all  essen- 
tial particulars  with  the  law.  He  must  know  that  his  sureties 
are  males,  that  they  are  resident  freeholders  of  the  township, 
village  or  city  in  which  the  business  is  to  be  carried  on,  that 
they  hold  none  of  the  offices  prohibited  by  the  act,  and  that 
at  the  time  the  bond  is  filed  neither  is  a  surety  upon  more  than 
two  bonds  required  by  the  act." 

It  appeared  that  one  of  the  sureties  was  already  upon  more 


120  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

than  two  bonds;  and  the  writ  was  granted  compelling  the  re- 
spondent to  reinstate  the  case.  The  case  of  People  v.  Roby  was 
cited  in  that  case  in  support  of  the  proposition  that  intent  was 
not  an   ingredient  of  the  offense. 

These  regulations  are  under  the  police  power  in  the  State. 
Undoubtedly  it  was  competent  for  the  legislature  to  prohibit  the 
sale  of  adulterated  articles  of  food  and  drink.  The  police  power 
of  the  State  extends  to  the  protection  of  the  health  as  well  as 
of  the  lives  and  property  of  the  citizens.  Generally  it  is  for 
the  legislature  to  determine  what  laws  and  regulations  are 
needed  to  protect  the  public  health  and  secure  the  public  com- 
fort and  safety.  If  it  passes  an  act  ostensibly  for  the  public 
health  and  thereby  destroys  or  takes  away  the  property  of  the 
citizen  or  interferes  with  his  liberty  it  is  for  the  courts  to  de- 
termine whether  it  relates  to  and  is  appropriate  to  promote 
such  public  health.  Under  the  police  power  the  conduct  of 
individuals  and  the  use  of  property  may  be  regulated  so  as  to 
interfere  to  some  extent  with  the  freedom  of  the  one  and  the 
enjoyment  of  the  other.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  legis- 
lature intended  by  this  act  to  protect  the  public  against  the 
harmful  consequences  of  sales  of  adulterated  food,  and  to  the 
end  that  its  purpose  might  not  be  defeated  to  require  the 
seller  at  his  peril  to  know  that  the  article  which  he  offers  for 
sale  is  not  adulterated. 

As  was  said  by  the  supreme  court  of  Ohio,  in  State  v.  Kelly, 
54  Ohio  St.  166:  "If  this  statute  had  imposed  upon  the  State 
the  burden  of  proving  *  *  *  his  knowledge  of  its  adultera- 
tion, it  would   thereby  have  defeated  its  declared  purpose." 

In  state  v.  Smith,  10  R.  I.  260,  the  court,  in  speaking  of  the 
offense  of  selling  adulterated  milk,  said:  ''Counsel  for  defend- 
ant asked  the  court  to  charge  that  there  must  be  evidence  of 
a  guilty  intent  on  the  part  of  the  defendant  and  of  a  guilty 
knowledge  in  order  to  convict  him.  Our  statute  in  that  pro- 
vision of  it,  under  which  this  indictment  was  found  does  not 
essentially  differ  from  the  statute  of  Massachusetts,  and  there 
previous  to  the  enactment  of  our  statute  the  supreme  court  had 
determined  that  a  person  might  be  convicted  although  he  had 
no  knowledge  of  the  adulteration;  the  intent  of  the  legislature 
being  that  the  seller  of  milk  should  take  upon  himself  the  risk 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  121 

of  knowing  that  the  article  he  offers  for  sale  is  not  adulterated." 
Statutes  in  many  states  have  been  passed  providing  that  who- 
ever sells,  or  keeps  or  offers  for  sale  adulterated  milk,  or  milk 
to  which  water  or  other  foreign  substance  has  been  added  shall 
be  punished,  etc.  Under  these  statutes  it  has  been  decided 
many  times  that  risk  is  upon  the  seller  of  knowing  that  the 
article  he  offers  for  sale  is  not  adulterated,  and  that  it  is  not 
necessary  in  an  indictment  under  such  a  statute  to  allege  or 
prove  criminal   intent  or  guilty  knowledge. 

Com.  v.  Smith,  103  Mass.,  444. 
Com.  V.  Warren,  160  Mass.,  533. 
People  V.  Clipperly,  101  N.  Y.,  634. 

The  same  rule  that  no  criminal  intent  is  necessary  has  been 
held  to  apply  under  an  act  forbidding  the  sale  of  oleomargarine 
or  other  imitations  of  dairy  products,  unless  express  notice  be 
given  to  the  purchaser. 

Bayles  v.  Newton,  50  N.  J.  L.,  549. 
Com.  V.  Gray,  150  Mass.,  327. 

The  English  rule  is  in  keeping  with  the  doctrine  in  this 
country  on  this  subject. 

Roberts  v.  Egerton,  L.  R.,  9  Q.  B.,  494. 

The  statute  not  requiring  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  seller 
to  make  the  offense  complete,  we  are  satisfied  that  the  con- 
viction must  be  sustained.  No  case  has  been  cited,  and  we  are 
not  able  to  find  one,  where  a  contrary  doctrine  is  laid  down. 
The  act  may  work  hardship  in  many  cases;  but  that  question 
is  one  to  be  addressed  to  the  legislature  and  not  to  the  courts. 
As  we  have  said,  it  was  within  the  power  of  the  legislature  to 
pass  the  act  making  it  an  offense  punishable  with  fine  and  im- 
prisonment to  sell  adulterated  food  or  drink,  although  the  per- 
son selling  the  same  has  no  knowledge  that  it  is  adulterated. 
Under  this  statute  one  making  sales  must  do  so  at  his  peril. 

The  conviction  is  aflBrmed. 

Grant,   J.,   did   not  sit.     The   other  justices   concurred. 


122  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

PEOPLE  V.   WORDEN  GROCERY  CO. 
(Opinion  filed  December  6,  1898.) 

Constitutional  Law — Act  to  Prevent  Sale  of  Adulterated  Vinegar 
— Complaint — Reasonableness   of   Statute — Defense. 

1.  The  title  to  an  act  reading  "An  act  in  relation  to  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  vinegar,  and  to  repeal  Act  No.  224  of 
the  Pubic  Acts  of  1889,  approved,  etc.,  held  broad  enough 
to  support  an  enactment  to  prevent  deception  in  the  sale  of 
vinegar  or  to  prevent  adulteration  of  vinegar. 

2.  A  conviction  for  a  sale  of  "fermented  cider  vinegar,"  which 
was  not  up  to  the  standard  prescribed  by  Act  No.  71,  Pub- 
lic Acts  of  1897,  may  be  had  under  a  complaint  drawn  under 
section  2  of  the  act. 

3.  The  question  as  to  whether  the  requirements  of  an  act 
passed  to  prevent  the  sale  of  adulterated  vinegar  are  such 
as  to  render  the  act  unreasonable,  cannot  be  determined  by 

the  courts  and  does  not  raise  a  question  of  fact  for  deter- 
mination by  a  jury, 

4.  Where  a  sample  of  vinegar  is  taken  from  a  dealer  for  the 
purpose  of  testing  it  to  see  if  it  conforms  to  the  standard 
required  by  law  it  is  not  necessary  that  a  sample  be  left  with 
the  dealer. 

5.  A  prosecution  for  a  sale  of  vinegar  in  violation  of  Act  No. 
71,  Public  Acts  of  1897,  cannot  be  defended  on  the  ground 
that  the  person  so  manufacturing  or  selling  vinegar  below 
the  standard  has  no  knowledge  that  it  is  not  within  the 
standard  prescribed. 

Error  to  the  circuit  court  of  Kent  county;   Allen  C.  Adsit,  J. 

Appeal  of  the  Worden  Grocer  Co.  from  a  conviction  of  a  viola- 
tion of  Act  No.  71,  Public  Acts  of  1897.    Affirmed. 

Frank  A.  Rodgers,  Prosecuting  Attorney;  Benn  M.  Corwin, 
Assistant  Prosecuting  Attorney,  for  the  people. 

Rood  &  Hindman,  for  respondent. 

Long,  J.:  The  complaint  in  this  cause  charges  that  the  de- 
fendant: "On  February  5,  1898,  did  unlawfully  sell  and  de- 
liver to  John  T.  Owens  of  Benton  Harbor,  Michigan,  a  large 
quantity,  to  wit:  One  barrel  of  vinegar  which  was  not  then 
and  there  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  Act  No.  71,  Pub- 


DAI.RY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  123 

lie  Acts,  1897,  in  this,  viz.:  That  said  vinegar  was  sold  as 
"fermented  cider  vinegar"  and  branded  as  such;  that  said  vin- 
egar contained  less  than  one  and  three-fourths  per  cent  by 
weight  upon  full  evaporation  (at  the  temperature  of  boiling 
water)  of  solids  contained  in  the  fruit  from  which  said  vinegar 
is  fermented,  to  wit:  One  and  fifty-one  one-hundred ths  per  cent 
of  solids;  and  said  vinegar  contained  less  than  two  and  a  half 
tenths  of  one  per  cent  ash  or  mineral  matter,  the  same  being 
the  product  of  the  material  from  which  said  vinegar  was  manu- 
factured, to  wit:  Eight  one-hundredths  of  one  per  cent  of  ash 
or  mineral  matter,  against  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case 
made  and   provided,"  etc. 

The  cause  was  commenced  in  the  police  court,  and,  being 
removed  to  the  circuit,  came  on  to  be  heard  before  a  jury.  The 
defendant  refused  to  plead,  and  counsel  for  defendant  there- 
upon made  a  motion  to  quash  the  complaint  and  summons  for 
several  reasons  which  will  hereafter  be  discussed.  The  court 
upon  the  trial  directed  a  verdict  of  guilty,  and  the  cause  comes 
to  this  court  on  exceptions  before  judgment. 

The  title  of  the  act  reads:  "An  act  in  relation  to  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  vinegar,  and  to  repeal  Act  No.  224  of  the 
Public  Acts  of  1889,  approved,"  etc.  Sections  one  and  two  of 
the    act,    being   the   sections    in   question,    provide: 

"Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan  enact,  That 
no  person  shall  manufacture  for  sale,  offer  or  expose  for  sale, 
sell  or  deliver,  or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell  or 
deliver,  any  vinegar  not  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of 
this  act.  No  vinegar  shall  be  sold  as  apple,  or  orchard  or  cider 
vinegar,  which  is  not  the  legitimate  product  of  pure  apple  juice, 
known  as  apple  cider  or  vinegar  not  made  exclusively  of  said 
apple  cider  or  vinegar  into  which  foreign  substance,  drugs  or 
acids  have  been  introduced,  as  may  appear  upon  proper  test, 
and  upon  said  test,  shall  contain  not  less  than  one  and  three- 
fourths  per  cent,  by  weight,  of  cider  vinegar  solids  upon  full 
evaporation  at  the  temperature  of  boiling  water. 

"Section  2.  All  vinegar  made  by  fermentation  and  oxidation 
without  the  intervention  of  distillation  shall  be  branded  'fer- 
mented vinegar'  with  the  name  of  the  fruit  or  substance  from 
which  the  same  is  made.  And  all  vinegar  made  wholly  or  in 
part  from  distilled  liquor  shall  be  branded  'distilled  vinegar,' 
and  all  of  such  distilled  vinegar  shall  be  free  from  coloring 
matter  added  during  or  after  distillation  and  from  color  other 


124  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

from  that  imparted  to  it  by  distillation.  And  all  fermented 
vinegar  not  distilled  shall  contain  not  less  than  one  and  three- 
fourths  per  cent,  by  weight,  upon  full  evaporation  (at  the  tem- 
perature of  boiling  water)  of  solids,  contained  in  the  fruit  or 
grain  from  which  said  vinegar  is  fermented,  and  said  vinegar 
shall  contain  not  less  than  two  and  a  half  tenths  of  one  per 
cent  ash  or  mineral  matter,  the  same  being  the  product  of  the 
material  from  which  said  vinegar  is  manufactured.  And  all 
vinegar  shall  be  made  wholly  from  the  fruit  or  grain  from 
which  it  purports  to  be  or  is  represented  to  be  made,  and  shall 
contain  no  foreign  substance  and  shall  contain  not  less  than 
four  per  cent,  by  weight,  of  absolute  acetic  acid." 

It  appears  by  the  testimony  that  the  defendant,  a  Michigan 
corporation  doing  business  at  Grand  Rapids,  on  February  5, 
1898,  sold  a  barrel  of  vinegar  to  one  John  T.  Owens  of  Benton 
Harbor.  The  sale  is  admitted.  A  sample  of  the  vinegar  was 
taken  from  this  barrel  and  analyzed  by  the  State  Analyst,  Mr. 
Fred  H.  Borradaile.  The  correctness  of  this  analysis  is  not 
disputed.  This  analysis  showed  that  the  vinegar  did  not  com- 
ply with  the  requirements  of  the  statute  in  that  it  did  not 
contain  the  amount  of  solids  nor  the  amount  of  ash  or  mineral 
matter  required. 

The  contentions  made  by  counsel  for  defendant  mostly  relate 
to  the  validity  of  the  act. 

1.  It  is  contended  that  the  title  to  the  act  does  not  express 
any  object;  that  the  act  was  intended  to  prevent  deception  in 
the  sale  of  vinegar  or  to  prevent  adulteration  of  vinegar,  but 
that  no  such  object  is  expressed  in  the  title;  and  that  the  act 
is  therefore  in  conflict  with  section  20  of  article  4,  of  the  con- 
stitution of  this  State,  which  provides  that:  '"No  law  shall  em- 
brace more  than  one  object,  which  shall  be  expressed  in  its 
title." 

We  think  this  contention  sufficiently  answereu  by  what  was 
said  by  this  court  in  Soukup  v.  VanDyke,  109  Mich.  681.  There 
the  title  was:  "An  act  relative  to  justices'  courts  in  the  city 
of  Grand  Rapids."  It  was  said:  "The  title  is  sufficient  if  it 
fairly  and  reasonably  announces  the  object  and  that  is  a  single 
one.  If  this  requirement  be  observed,  the  legislature  must  de- 
termine for   itself  how   broad   and   comprehensive  shall  be   the 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  125 

object  of   a  statute  and   how   much    particularity  shall   be  em- 
ployed in  the  title  in  defining  it." 

In  People  v.  Kelly,  U9  Mich.  82,  the  title  under  discussion 
was:  "Act  act  relative  to  disorderly  persons,  and  to  repeal," 
etc. 

See   also: 

State  V.  County  Judges,  2  Iowa,  280. 
McAunich  v.  The  Miss.  &  Mo.  R.  R.  Co.,  20  Iowa, 
342. 

2.  Counsel  contend  that  the  complaint  being  drawn  under 
section  two  of  the  act,  no  conviction  can  follow;  that  if  any 
violation  of  the  law  be  found,  it  is  of  section  one  and  not  of 
section  two  of  the  act;  that,  therefore,  the  complaint  was 
drawn   under  the  wrong  section. 

This  contention  cannot  be  sustained.  It  is  plain  from  the 
reading  of  these  sections  that  the  legislature  intended  that  all 
fermented  vinegar  should  come  up  to  the  required  standard, 
whether  made  from  fruit  or  grain. 

3.  The  defendant  contends  that  the  act  is  unreasonable  and 
therefore  void  as  beyond  the  police  power  of  the  State,  in  that 
the  test  for  cider  vinegar  in  regard  to  solids  is  arbitrary,  un- 
scientific and  not  calculated  to  accomplish  the  end  sought  by 
the  legislature,  viz.:  To  protect  the  public  health  against 
spurious  vinegar;  that  such  test  is  no  test,  because: 

a.  Said  solids  and  ash  are  indifferent  ingredients  of  vinegar 
from  a  hygienic  standpoint. 

b.  Their  comparative  absence  or  presence  is  not  an  essential 
ingredient   of    pure   apple    cider   vinegar. 

c.  A  vinegar  can  be  manufactured  which  will  satisfy  the  re- 
quirements of  the  statute  and  yet  contain  no  materials  from 
apples  or  the  product  of  apples. 

d.  A  pure  apple  cider  vinegar  is  frequently  made  which  is 
below  the   requirements  of  the  statute  in  solids  and  ash. 

e.  The  less  proportion  of  solids  is  a  proof  of  greater  purity 
in  the  vinegar  and  of  its   better  keeping  qualities. 

These  questions  might  very  properly  be  addressed  to  the  leg- 
islature, but  are  matters  with  which  the  court  has  nothing 
to   do.     It   is   not  a  part  of  the  functions  of  the  court  to   in- 


126  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

vestigate  the  facts  entering  into  questions  of  public  policy 
merely.  Under  our  system  that  power  is  lodged  in  the  legisla- 
tive branch  of  the  government.  It  belongs  to  that  branch  to 
determine  primarily  what  measures  are  appropriate  or  needful 
for  the  protection  of  the  public  morals,  the  public  health  or  the 
public  safety. 

Barton  v.  McWhinney,  85  Ind.,  481. 
Mugler  V.  Kansas,  123  U.  S.,  660. 
Powell  V.   Pennsylvania,  127   U.   S.   685. 

In  People  v.  Snowberger,  113  Mich.  92,  it  was  said  by  this 
court:  "The  act  may  work  hardship  in  many  cases,  but  that 
question  is  one  to  be  addressed  to  the  legislature  and  not  to 
the  courts." 

The  question  of  the  reasonableness  of  the  acts  found  in  many 
states  relative  to  the  sale  of  milk  below  a  certain  standard  has 
been  frequently  raised  in  the  courts,  and  the  acts  upheld. 

In  Com.  V.  Evans,  132  Mass.  11,  the  court  passing  upon  such 
a  statute  said:  "The  intention  of  the  legislature  and  the  prac- 
tical operation  of  this  section  in  connection  with  the  third  sec- 
tion is  to  provide  that  it  shall  be  unlawful  to  sell  milk  con- 
taining less  than  thirteen  per  centum  of  milk  solids.  This  be- 
longs to  the  class  of  police  regulations  designated  to  prevent 
frauds  and  to  protect  the  health  of  the  people,  which  it  is  with- 
in the  constitutional   power  of  the  legislature  to  enact." 

In  State  v.  Smyth,  14  R.  I.  100,  the  court  said:  "It  was  the 
purpose  of  the  statute  to  prohibit,  not  only  the  dealing  in  milk 
which  had  been  adulterated,  but  also  in  milk  of  such  inferior 
quality  as  to  fall  below  the  standard  named  in  section  three. 
It  is  equally  a  fraud  on  the  buyer,  whether  the  milk  which  he 
buys  was  originally  good  and  has  been  deteriorated  by  the  ad- 
dition of  water  or  whether  in  its  natural  state  it  is  so  poor 
that  it  contains  the  same  proportion  of  water  as  that  which  has 
been  adulterated."     See  also: 

State  V.  Newton,  45  N.  J.  L.,  469. 
Bertholf  v.   O'Reilly,   74  N.  Y.,  509. 
State  V.  Campbell,  64  N.  H.,  403. 
10    Am.    St.   Rep.,   419. 

But   counsel   contend   that   the   reasonableness   of   this   act   is 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  127 

a  question  of  fact  for  the  jury  to  determine  from  the  expert 
chemical  evidence. 

This  question  is  neither  for  the  court  nor  the  jury  to  deter- 
mine. In  People  v.  Clipperly,  101  N.  Y.  634,  that  very  question 
was  discussed  and  decided  adversely  to  the  claim  here.  It  was 
said:  "The  defendant  takes  the  broader  ground  that  the  legis- 
lature cannot  under  the  constitution  prohibit  the  sale  of  milk 
drawn  from  healthy  cows  which  in  its  natural  state  falls  below 
standard  fixed  by  the  act,  unless  such  milk,  or  the  articles 
made  from  it,  are  in  fact  unwholesome  or  dangerous  to  public 
health.  How  is  that  question  of  fact  to  be  determined?  The 
court  cannot  take  judicial  notice  whether  milk  below  the  stand- 
ard is  or  is  not  unwholesome  or  dangerous  to  public  health. 
Is  that  to  be  a  question  for  the  jury?  If  so,  the  court  must 
charge  a  jury  in  each  case  that  if  they  find  milk  below  that 
standard  to  be  unwholesome,  then  the  statute  is  constitu- 
tional; if  they  find  it  to  be  wholesome,  then  the  statute  is  un- 
constitutional. Evidently  a  constitutional  question  cannot  be 
settled,  or  rather,  unsettled  in  that  way.  The  constitutionality 
would  vary  with  the  varying  judgments  of  juries." 

In  the  emery  wheel  case  before  us,  in  People  v.  Smith,  108 
Mich,  p.  534,  a  somewhat  similar  question  was  discussed.  It 
was  said:  "If  the  courts  find  the  plain  provisions  of  the  con- 
stitution violated,  or  if  it  can  be  said  that  the  act  is  not  within 
the  rule  of  necessity  in  view  of  facts  of  which  judicial  notice 
may  be  taken,  then  the  act  must  fall;  otherwise  it  should 
stand." 


See  also: 


People  V.   Girard,   145  N.  Y.,  109. 
(45  Am.  St.  Rep.  595.) 


4.  Counsel  also  contend  that  defendant  was  not  allowed,  nor 
could  it  obtain,  a  sample  of  the  vinegar  in  question  for  analysis, 
and  was  deprived  of  the  right  to  produce  evidence  as  to  the 
amount  of  solids  in  the  vinegar;  and  was  thus  deprived  of 
property  without  due  process  of  law. 

The  record  shows  that  the  defendant  was  not  prevented  from 
getting  a  sample  of  the  vinegar  by  any  person  interested  in  the 
prosecution  of  the  suit.    The  record  shows  that  the  only  effort 


128  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

it  made  to  get  such  sample  was  a  letter  written  to  Mr,  Owens 
who  had  bought  and  paid  for  the  vinegar,  requesting  him  to 
return  it,  to  which  the  defendant  received  no  reply,  and  it  does 
not  appear  that  Mr.  Owens  had  any  of  the  vinegar  left  at  that 
time.  No  sample  was  left  with  the  defendant  by  the  prose- 
cution;  nor  was  this  necessary. 

Com.  V.  Coleman,  157  Mass.,  460. 

5.  This  statute  forbids  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  vinegar 
not  in  compliance  therewith;  and  persons  manufacturing  or 
selling  vinegar  below  the  standard  do  so  at  their  peril.  It  is 
no  defense  that  the  person  so  manufacturing  or  selling  vinegar 
below  the  standard  has  no  knowledge  that  it  is  not  within  the 
standard   prescribed. 

People  V.  Snowberger,  113  Mich.,  86;    71  N.  W.  R., 
497. 

We  have  examined  the  other  questions  raised,  but  do  not 
deem  it  necessary  to  discuss  them.  They  relate  mostly  to  offers 
of  testimony  which  the  court  below  ruled  out;  and,  we  think, 
properly. 

The  testimony  was  uncontradicted  that  the  vinegar  sold  was 
not  in  compliance  with  the  statute.     The  sale  was  admitted. 

The  court  was  not  in  error  in  directing  the  verdict.  The  con- 
viction  must  be   affirmed. 

Grant,   C.   J.,   did   not  sit.     The  other  justices   concurred. 


PEOPLE  V.   DETTENTHALER. 
GROSVENOR  v.  JACKSON  CIRCUIT  JUDGE. 

(Opinions  filed   December   6,   1898.) 

Constitutional  Law — Passage  of  Act  Without  Enacement  Clause 

— Constitutional   Provision   Mandatory — Addition   of   Clause 

by   Governor — Act   76,   Laws  of   1897,   Invalid. 

1.  The  provision  in  the  Michigan  State  constitution,  found  in 
Sec.  48  of  Art.  IV.,  that  all  laws  shall  be  styled,  "The  People 
of  the  State  of  Michigan  enact,"  is  mandatory  and  the  pas- 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  129 


sage  of  an  act  without  the  enactment  clause  renders  the  act 
invalid. 

2.  The  addition  of  the  enacting  clause  by  the  Governor  before 
aflaxing  his  signature  will  not  render  the  law  valid  which 
was  passed  without  an  enactment  clause. 

3.  Act  No.  76,  Laws  of  1897,  being  "An  act  to  prevent  decep- 
tion in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  imitation  butter"  held 
to  be  invalid  because  of  the  passage  of  the  act  without  an 
enactment  clause  was  not  rendered  valid  by  the  addition 
of  such  clause  by  the  Governor  before  aflftxing  his  signa- 
ture to  the  act. 

Error  to  the  superior  court  of  Grand  Rapids;  Edwin  A.  Bur- 
lingame,  judge. 

Exceptions  taken  by  Frank  J.  Dettenthaler  from  a  conviction 
of  a  violation  of  the  pure  food  law. — Reversed  and  no  new  trial. 

Frank  D.  Rodgers,  Prosecuting  Attorney,  (Rodgers,  McDonald 
&  Corwin  of  counsel),  for  the  people. 

Rood  &  Hindman,  and  E.  F.  Sweet,  for  respondent. 

Certiorari  by  Elliot  O.  Grosvenor,  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sioner, to  review  the  action  of  the  Jackson  circuit  judge  in 
denying   a  mandamus.     Affirmed. 

John  G.  Hawley  and  Benn  M.  Corwin,  for  relator. 

Rood  &  Hindman  and  E.  F.  Sweet,  for  respondent. 

Hooker,  J.:  These  cases  involve  the  validity  of  Act  No.  76, 
Public  Acts,  1897,  which  is   as  follows: 

"An  act  to  prevent  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
imitation  butter." 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan  enact.  That 
no  person,  by  himself  or  his  agents,  or  servants,  shall  render 
or  manufacture,  sell,  offer  for  sale,  expose  for  sale,  or  have  in 
his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any  article,  product  or  com- 
pound made  wholly  or  in  part  out  of  any  fat,  oil  or  oleaginous 
substance  or  compound  thereof,  not  produced  from  unadul- 
terated milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  which  shall  be  in  imita- 
tion of  yellow  butter  produced  from  pure  unadulterated  milk  or 
cream  from  the  same:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall 
be  construed  to  prohibit  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  oleomar- 
17 


130  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

garine  in  a  separate  and  distinct  form,  and  in  such  manner  as 
will  advise  the  consumer  of  its  real  character,  free  from  colora- 
tion or  ingredient,  that  causes  it  to  look  like  butter. 

Sec.  2.  Whoever  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of  section  one 
(1)  of  this  act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  and  the 
costs  of  prosecution,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail,  or 
State  House  of  Correction  and  Reformatory  at  Ionia,  for  not 
less  than  six  months  nor  more  than  three  years,  or  by  both 
such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the  court  for 
each  and  every  offense. 

Approved  April  15,  1897. 

The  evidence  in  the  first  entitled  cause  shows  that  the  de- 
dendant  was  convicted  of  the  alleged  offense  of  selling  oleo- 
margarine   in   contravention    of  this  act. 

In  the  other  a  complaint  was  made  of  a  similar  act  to  a 
justice,  who  refused  to  issue  the  warrant,  and  on  application 
the  circuit  court  denied  a  mandamus  to  compel  it.  The  cases 
raise  substantially  the  same  questions,  and  were  argued,  and 
will  be  considered  together.  The  validity  of  the  law  is  ques- 
tioned. The  record  shows  that  this  was  a  senate  bill  and 
passed  the  senate  without  the  constitutional  enacting  clause. 
The  records  of  the  house  show  that  the  bill  was  reported  by  the 
committee  on  agriculture  and  the  committee  of  the  whole,  with- 
out amendment,  and  with  the  recommendation  that  it  be  passed. 
Under  the  head  of  "third  reading  of  bills  upon  passage,"  the 
record  of  the  house  shows  that  "pending  the  third  reading  of 
the  bill,  Mr.  Chamberlain  moved  that  the  bill  be  recommitted  to 
the  committee  of  the  whole,  which  motion  did  not  prevail.  The 
bill  having  been  read  a  third  time,  and  the  question  being  upon 
its  passage  pending  the  taking  of  the  vote,  Mr.  Graham  de- 
manded the  previous  question.  The  demiand  was  seconded. 
The  question  being,  'Shall  the  main  question  be  now  put?'  The 
same  was  ordered.  The  bill  was  then  passed,  a  majority  of 
all  the  members  elect  voting,  therefor,  by  yeas  and  nays,  as 
follows:  *  *  *  yeas  56,  nays  19."  As  this  is  the  only  time 
the  bill  was  before  the  house,  we  must  find  that  the  bill  passed 
the  house  without  an  enacting  clause,  unless  the  contrary  can 
be  shown  by  other  evidence.  Counsel  undertook  to  show  that 
it  was  amended  in  this  particular,  by  the  records  of  the  senate. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  131 

and  the  testimony  of  the  ckrk  of  the  house.  The  evidence  is  In 
brief,  that  previous  to  the  passage  of  the  bill  in  the  house  the 
clerk  noticed  the  absence  of  the  enacting  clause,  and  brought 
it  to  the  attention  of  the  house,  and  said  that  he  would  enter 
one,  and  accordingly  wrote  the  words  in  th-e  original  bill,  i.  e., 
the  one  which  was  then  before  the  house.  He  did  not  testify 
that  the  house  took  any  action  upon  it,  or  that  any  record  was 
made  of  it. 

The  senate  record  shows  that  the  bill  was  subsequently  re- 
turaed  to  the  senate,  accompanied  by  a  letter  from  the  clerk  of 
the  house,  reading  as  follows: 

"House  of  Representatives. 

"Lansing,  April  7,  1897. 
"To  the  president  of  the  Senate: 

"Sir — I  am  instructed  by  the  House  to  return  to  the  Senate 
the  following  bill:      Senate  bill  No.  6,  file  No.  24,  entitled 

"  'A  bill  to  prevent  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
imitation  butter'  and  to  inform  the  Senate  that  the  House  has 
amended  the  same  as  follows:  By  inserting  in  line  1,  Section 
1,  after  the  words  'Section  1,'  the  words  'The  People  of  the 
State  of  Michigan  enact.' 

Very  r€spectfully, 

"LEWIS  M.  MILLER. 
"Clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 
"In  the  passage  of  which,  as  thus  amended,  the  House  has  con- 
curred by  a  majority  vote  of  all  the  members  elect." 

It  further  appears  that  the  senate  concurred  in  such  amend- 
ment. 

We  must  determine,  therefore,  whether  the  house  is  shown 
to  have  amended  the  bill  by  inserting  an  enacting  clause  and 
if   not   whether   the    law    is    valid    without   it. 

The  most  that  can  be  claimed  is  that  there  is  oral  testimony, 
that  the  clerk  announced  its  absence  and  stated  that  he  would 
supply  it.  Inferentially  perhaps  we  may  say  that  there  was  no 
objection  made,  but  the  evidence  is  silent  as  to  what,  if  any- 
thing, occurred.  There  is  nothing  but  this  inference  of  silence 
which  imports  acquiescence  in  the  amendment.  There  is  noth- 
ing to  show  definite  action  by  the  house  which  alone  had  power 
to  amend  the  bill  before  it.  So  that  if  the  clause  is  essential 
to  the  validity  of  the  act  we  need  not  discuss  the  propriety  of 


132  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

admitting  parol  evidence  to  prove  an  amendment  which  should 
be  shown  by  the  record  if  one  was  authorized. 

See  Attorney  General  v.  Rice,  64  Mich.  391. 
Hart  V.  McBlroy,  72  Mich.  446. 
Sackrider  v.  Supervisors,  79  Mich.  66. 

Is  the  constitutional  enacting  clause  a  requisite  to  a  valid 
law?  This  must  depend  upon  whether  the  constitutional  pro- 
vision is  to  be  considered  a  mandatory  provision  or  directory 
merely. 

See  Constitution,  Art.  IV.,  Sec.  48. 

Among  the  authorities  cited  by  .the  relator  in  support  of  his 
contention,  is  that  of  Swann  v.  Buck,  40  Miss.  268.  The  con- 
stitutional provision  is  similar  to  ours,  and  it  was  held  that 
a  stubstantial  compliance  was  suflacient.  In  that  case  the  style 
of  the  resolution  was:  "Resolved  by  the  legislature  of  the 
State  of  Mississippi."  The  court  was  unable  to  discover  a 
previous  judicial  decision  of  the  question,  but  quoted  Mr.  Gush- 
ing to  the  effect  that  the  prescribed  "form  must  be  strictly  pur- 
sued, and  that  no  equivalent  language  will  be  sufficient,"  and 
while  declining  to  accept  his  rule  said:  "It  is  necessary  that 
every  law  should  show  on  its  face  the  authority  by  which  it 
is  adopted,  and  promulgated,  and  that  it  should  clearly  appear 
that  it  is  intended  by  the  legislative  power  that  enacts  it  that 
it  should  take  effect  as  a  law.  These  conditions  being  fulfilled 
all  that  is  absolutely  necessary  is  expressed.  The  word  're- 
solved,' is  as  potent  to  declare  the  legislative  will,  as  the  word 
'enacted.' " 

The  case  of  McPherson  v.  Leonard,  29  Md.  377,  held  that  the 
provision  of  the  constitution  of  Maryland  was  directory,  and 
that  the  omission  of  the  words,  "by  the  general  assembly  of 
Maryland,"  did  not  render  the  law  invalid.  The  question  ap- 
pears to  have  been  treated  as  a  new  one. 

The  case  of  Cape  Gir'ardeau  v.  Riley,  52  Mo.  427,  follows  the 
Maryland  case,  in  holding  the  provision  directory;  the  court 
saying  that  after  diligent  search,  no  case  holding  to  the  con- 
trary had  been  found.  In  this  case,  like  the  one  before  us,  the 
entire  enacting  clause  was  wanting.  In  this  connection  we  may 
add  that  previous  decisions  of  the  same  court,  holding  the  pro- 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  133 

vision  that  writs  should  run  in  the  name  of  the  state,  was  di- 
rectory, were  given  weight.  In  our  State  a  contrary  holding 
will  be  found. 

See  Forbes  v.  Darling,  94  Mich.  621. 

There  are,  however,  cases  which  take  a  contrary  view  of  the 
law,  and  adhere  to  the  doctrine  asserted  by  Mr.  Gushing,  and 
the  late  Mr.  Justice  Cooky,  in  his  work  on  constitutional  limita- 
tions, 6  Ed.,   p.   93,  viz.: 

"But  the  courts  tread  upon  very  dangerous  ground  when  they 
venture  to  apply  the  rules  which  distinguish  directory  and 
mandatory  statutes  to  the  provisions  of  a  constitution.  Consti- 
tutions do  not  usually  undertake  to  prescribe  mere  rules  of  pro- 
ceeding, except  when  such  rules  are  looked  upon  as  essential  to 
the  thing  to  be  done;  and  they  must  then  be  regarded  in  the 
light  of  limitations  upon  the  power  to  be  exercised.  It  is  the 
province  of  an  instrument  of  this  solemn  and  permanent  char- 
acter to  establish  those  fundamental  maxims  and  fix  those  un- 
varying rules  by  which  all  departments  of  the  government  must 
at  all  times  shape  their  conduct,  and  if  it  descends  to  prescrib- 
ing mere  rules  of  order  in  unessential  matters,  it  is  lowering 
the  proper  dignity  of  such  an  instrument,  and  usurping  the 
proper  province  of  ordinary  legislation.  We  are  not,  therefore, 
to  expect  to  find  a  constitutional  provision  which  the  people, 
in  adopting  it,  have  not  regarded  as  of  high  importance,  and 
worthy  to  be  embraced  in  an  instrument,  which,  for  a  time  at 
least,  is  to  control  alike  the  government  and  the  governed,  and 
to  form  a  standard  by  which  is  to  be  measured  the  power  which 
can  be  exercised  as  well  by  the  delegate  as  by  the  sovereign 
people  themselves.  If  directions  are  given  respecting  the  times 
or  modes  of  proceeding  in  which  a  power  should  be  exercised, 
there  is  at  least  a  strong  presumption  that  the  people  designed 
it  should  be  exercised,  in  that  time  and  mode  only;  and  we 
impute  to  the  people  a  want  of  due  appreciation  of  the  purpose 
and  proper  province  of  such  an  instrument,  when  we  infer  that 
such  directions  are  given  to  any  other  end.  Especially  when, 
as  has  already  been  said,  it  is  but  fair  to  presume  that  the 
people  in  their  constitution  have  expressed  themselves  in  care- 
ful and  measured  terms,  corresponding  with  the  immense  im- 
portance of  the  powers  delegated,  and  with  a  view  to  leave  as 
little  as  possible  to  implication." 

There  are  some  cases,  however,  where  the  doctrine  of  di- 
rectory statutes  has  been  applied  to  constitutional  provisions, 
but  they  are  so  plainly  at  variance  with  the  weight  of  author- 


134  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

ity  upon  the  precise  points  considered  that  we  feel  warranted 
in  saying  that  the  judicial  decisions  as  they  now  stand  do  not 
sanction  the  application. 

The  question  arose  in  Washington  territory  over  a  law  fixing 
the  seat  of  government,  and  the  opinion  of  Gushing  was  quoted 
and  followed.  1  Wash.  Ter.  116.  The  case  of  Nevada  v.  Rogers, 
10  Nevada  250,  decided  in  1875,  did  the  same.  An  extended  dis- 
cussion of  the  subject  will  be  found  in  that  case,  in  support  of 
the  proposition  that  the  language  of  the  constitution  should  be 
literally    followed. 

The  opinion  concludes  with  the  following  pertinent  and  em- 
phatic   language : 

"Our  constitution  expressly  provides  that  the  enacting  clause 
of  every  law  shall  be  'The  People  of  the  State  of  Nevada,  rep- 
resented in  senate  and  assembly,  do  enact  as  follows.'  This  lan- 
guage is  susceptible  of  but  one  interpretation.  There  is  no 
doubtful  meaning  as  to  the  intention.  It  is,  in  our  judgment, 
an  imperative  mandate  of  the  people  in  their  sovereign  capac- 
ity to  the  legislature,  requiring  that  all  laws  to  be  binding  upon 
them  shall,  upon  their  face,  express  the  authority  by  which 
they  were  enacted,  and  as  this  act  comes  to  us  without  such 
authority  appearing  upon  its  face,  it  is  not  a  law." 

The  case  of  the  State  v.  Patterson,  98  N.  C.  662,  is  strong  in 
its  condemnation  of  the  practice  of  treating  constitutional  re- 
quirements as  directory.  The  case  of  Powell  v.  Jackson,  51 
Mich.  130,  is  not  in  point,  as  the  bill  was  duly  and  seasonably 
amended,  if  we  may  accept  the  statement  of  the  briefs  of  the 
counsel  and  the  syllabus. 

The  trend  of  the  weight  of  the  authority  is  in  our  opinion 
against  the  relator's  contention. 

It  is  urged  with  some  plausibility  that  the  insertion  of  this 
provision  previous  to  the  signature  by  the  Governor  is  a  suffi- 
cient compliance  with  the  constitution,  from  which  we  under- 
stand the  claim  to  be  made  that  although  the  enacting  clause 
was  wanting  when  the  bill  came  to  the  Governor  it  might  have 
been  supplied  by  him.  But  it  is  thought  that  this  proposition 
is  tenable  only  upon  the  assumption  that  the  constitutional  pro- 
vision is  directory  merely.  The  Governor  has  no  power  to  make 
laws.     The  legislative  power  is  in  no  part  vested  in  him,  being 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  135 


by  Sec.  1.  Article  IV,  of  the  constitution,  vested  in  the  senate 
and  house  of  representatives.  It  is  not  the  d€sign  of  the  con- 
stitution that  he  should  legislate.  His  office  is  a  check  upon 
the  legislature  and  he  may  compel  a  reconsideration  of  a  bill 
by  seasonably  returning  it  to  the  appropriate  house  with  his 
objections  to  it,  and  when  the  legislature  has  adjourned  his 
Qeglect  to  sign  it  prevents  it  from  becoming  a  law,  but  he  has 
not  the  slightest  power  in  framing  the  law.  Indeed,  it  is  a 
fundamental  principal  in  American  constitutions  that  the  execu- 
tive shall  not  make  laws.  The  following  language  from  the 
opinion  in  the  case  of  State  of  Nevada  v.  Rogers,  10  Nev.  250, 
is  apropos  to  this  subject: 

'Without  the  concurrence  of  the  senate  the  people  have  no 
power  to  enact  any  law.  Every  i)erson  at  all  familiar  with  the 
practice  of  legislative  bodies  is  aware  that  one  of  the  most 
common  methods  adopted  to  kill  a  bill  and  prevent  its  becoming 
a  law,  is  for  a  member  to  move  to  strike  out  the  enacting 
clause.  If  such  motion  is  carried  the  bill  is  lost.  Can  it  be 
seriously  contended  that  such  a  bill,  with  its  head  cut  off,  could 
thereafter  by  any  legislative  action  become  a  law?  Certainly 
not.  The  certificates  of  the  proper  officers  of  the  senate  and 
assembly,  that  such  an  act  was  passed  in  their  respective 
houses,  do  not,  and  could  not  impart  vitality  to  any  act  which, 
upon  its  face,  failed  to  express  the  authority  by  which  it  was 
enacted." 

This  being  so,  the  only  justification  for  the  insertion  of  the 
enacting  clause  by  the  Governor  is  to  be  found  in  the  assump- 
tion that  it  is  a  clerical  omission  of  an  unimportant  matter  and 
it  might  as  well  be  held  that  one  of  the  houses,  or  a  clerk,  or 
even  the  printer  of  the  laws,  might  make  the  correction,  as  that 
the    Governor   might  do   it. 

Some  of  the  states  have  sustained  laws  without  enacting 
clauses,  but  we  do  not  know  of  one  that  has  made  their  validity 
depend  upon  the  unauthorized  action  of  some  officer  or  person. 
They  have  preferred  to  rest  their  action  upon  the  well  recog- 
nized distinction  between  mandatory  and  directory  provisions. 
If  the  provision  is  mandatory  that  the  law  shall  have  a 
prescribed  style  and  the  making  of  laws  is  confined  to  the  leg- 
islative branch  of  the  government,  it  cannot  be  consistently  held 
that  omissions  of  essential  parts  of  a  law  may  be  supplied  and 


136  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

corrections  made  by  persons  without  authority;  and  the  public 
necessities  should  be  much  greater  than  in  the  presient  case, 
before  such  a  proposition  should  be  seriously  considered.  If 
on  the  other  hand  there  is  warrant  for  treating  the  provision 
as  directory,  a  much  less  dangerous  precedent  is  established. 
But  as  has  been  shown,  the  weight  of  authority  forbids  it,  and 
in  our  opinion  it  will  be  an  unfortunate  day  for  constitutional 
rights  when  courts  begin  the  insidious  process  of  undermining 
constitutions  by  holding  unambiguous  provisions  and  limita- 
tions to  be  directory  merely,  to  be  disregarded  at  pleasure.  In 
the  present  case  it  will  be  much  better  that  the  legislatune 
shall  correct  its  mistake,  than  that  the  courts  shall  sanction  the 
irregular  correction. 

We  are  therefore  constrained  to  hold  that  the  law  under  dis- 
cussion is  void,  and  in  the  certiorari  case  the  order  is  affirmed, 
in  that  of  Dettenthaler  the  conviction  is  reversed  and  no  new 
trial    ordered.     The   other  justices   concurred. 


GROSVERNOR   v.   DUFFY. 

(Opinion  filed  September  18,  1899.) 

Pure  Food  Law — Sale  of  Oleomargarine  Colored  to  Imitate  But- 
ter— Constitutionality  of  Act. 

The  sale  of  oleomargarine  colored  with  a  harmless  substance  to 
imitate  June  butter,  but  which  is  sold  and  purchased  as 
oleomargarine,  is  not  in  violation  of  section  3  of  Act  118  of 
the  Public  Acts  of  1897,  being  an  act  to  prohibit  and  pre- 
vent adulteration,  fraud  and  deception  in  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  articles  of  food  and  drink. 

Certiorari  to  review  the  action  of  the  Washtenaw  circuit 
judge  in  refusing  the  application  of  Elliot  O.  Grosvenor,  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner,  for  mandamus  to  compel  John  L. 
Duffy,  justice  of  the  peace,  to  issue  a  warrant.     Affirmed. 

Smedley  &  Corwin,  for  relator. 

John   J.   Speed  and  J.  P.  Lee,  for  respondent. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  137 

The  relator  presented  to  a  justice  of  the  peace  a  complaint 
in  writing,  charging  that  "Casper  Rinsey  did  unlawfully  offer 
and  expose  for  sale,  and  did  unlawfully  sell  and  deliver  to  said 
Elliot  O.  Grosvenor,  a  large  quantity,  to  wit,  one  pound  of  eleo- 
margarine,  which  was  then  and  there  an  article  of  food  intended 
to  be  eaten  by  man,  and  which  was  then  and  there  adulterated 
within  the  meaning  of  Act  No.  193  of  the  Public  Acts  of  Michi- 
gan for  the  year  1895,  as  amended  by  Act  No.  118  of  the  Public 
Acts  of  Michigan  for  the  year  1897,  in  this,  to  wit:  that  said 
oleomargarine  was  then  and  there  an  imitation  of  another  arti- 
cle of  food,  to-wit:  an  imitation  of  a  rich  June  butter;  and 
said  oleomargarine  had  been  and  was  then  and  there  colored, 
whereby  inferiority  was  concealed  and  by  which  means  it  was 
mad'e  to  appear  better  and  of  greater  value  than  it  really  was, 
to  wit,  in  this:  That  it  was  thereby  made  to  appear  like  but- 
ter of  a  grade  which  was  then  and  there  of  a  greater  value  than 
the  said  oleomargarine;  that  the  said  oleomargarine  was  labeled 
'oleomargarine'  and  stamped  with  the  seller's  name;  and  that 
the  tub  and  wrapper  which  contained  the  same  bore  the  name 
and  address  of  the  manufacturer  and  was  distinctly  labeled 
oleomargarine," 

"Said  complainant  on  his  oath  aforesaid,  further  says,  that 
he  called  for  oleomargarine,  and  that  the  said  oleomargarine 
was  sold  to  him  as  oleomargarine  the  same  as  to  an  ordinary 
customer,  freely  and  without  objection,  and  that  for  this  reason 
he  did  not  take  the  steps  required  by  section  6,  Act  No.  154  of 
the  Public  Acts  of  Michigan  for  the  year  1897." 

The  justice  refused  to  entertain  the  complaint  and  issue  a 
warrant,  whereupon  the  relator  applied  to  the  circuit  court  for 
Washtenaw  county  for  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  compel  the 
justice  to  issue  a  warrant  and  proceed  to  hear  the  case.  The 
circuit  court  refused  the  writ  and  the  case  is  brought  to  this 
court  by  certiorari  for  review. 

Grant,  C.  J.  (after  stating  the  facts).  The  title  of  the  act 
reads  "An  act  to  prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration,  fraud  and 
deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  articles  of  food  and 
drink."  Sec.  3,  as  amended  by  Act  No.  118,  Public  Acts  1897, 
so  far  as  it  applies  to  this  case,  reads: 


138  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

''An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated  within  the 
meaning  of  this  act:    *   *   * 

"Fourth — If  it  is  an  imitation  of,  or  sold  under  the  name  of 
another  article.     *     *     * 

"Sixth — ^If  it  is  colored,  coated,  polished  or  powdered,  whereby 
damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed,  or  if  by  any  means  it  is 
made  to  appear  better  or  of  greater  value  than  it  really  is. 

"Seventh — If  it  contains  any  added  substance  or  ingredient 
which  is  poisonous  or  injurious  to  health:  Provided,  That 
nothing  in  this  act  shall  prevent  the  coloring  of  pure  butter; 
And  provided  further.  That  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not 
apply  to  mixtures  or  compounds  recognized  as  ordinary  articles 
or  ingredients  of  articles  of  food,  if  each  and  every  package 
sold  or  offered  for  sale,  bear  the  name  and  address  of  the 
manufacturer  and  be  distinctly  labeled  under  its  own  distinc- 
tive name,  and  in  a  manner  so  as  to  plainly  and  correctly  show 
that  it  is  a  mixture  or  compound,  and  is  not  in  violation  with 
definition    fourth   and    seventh    of   this   section." 

It  is  not  claimed  that  the  sale  made  by  Rinsey  violates  sub- 
division seven.  The  act  charged  in  the  complaint  is  neither 
adulteration,  fraud  nor  deception  under  any  definition  of  these 
words  to  be  found  in  any  dictionary.  Adulteration  is  "the  act 
of  corrupting  or  debasing,  the  act  of  mixing  something  impure 
or  spurious  with  something  pure  or  genuine,  or  an  inferior 
article  with  a  superior  one  of  the  same  kind." 

Bouv.,  L.  D.,  126. 
Century  Dictionary. 

Counsel  do  not  urge  that  it  comes  within  the  word  "fraud" 
or  "deceit."  Neither  is  it  urged  that  the  article  is  made  to 
appear  of  greater  value  than  it  really  is.  It  is  not  claimed  that 
the  coloring  matter  used  is  in  the  least  deleterious.  The  law 
'J 'permits  its  use  to  color  butter.  Counsel  rely  upon  People  v. 
Snowberger,  113  Mich.  86.  That  case  is  not  in  point.  The 
gravamen  of  the  offense  there  was  that  the  article  of  food  was 
damaged,  inferior,  its  inferiority  concealed,  and  it  was  made  to 
appear   of  greater  value   than   it  really  was. 

This  brings   us   to  the  only  question  we   need  to  determine^ 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  139 

viz.:  Is  the  title  to  the  act  broad  enough  to  include  the  sale 
complained  of?  Would  any  person  reading  the  title  to  the  bill 
in  the  legislative  journals,  or  elsewhere,  suppose  that  the  bill 
would  make  criminal  an  act  which  in  itself  was  entirely  harm- 
less, honest,  innocent  and  contained  no  element  of  wrong-doing? 
Or  that  it  would  change  the  well  known  definition  of  a  word  so 
as  to  include  within  it  things  which  were  in  no  sense  akin  to 
it  and  which  could  only  be  included  in  it  by  the  most  arbitrary 
legislative  enactments?  Would  a  manufacturer  of,  or  dealer  in 
butter  or  oleomargarine,  be  notified  by  the  title  that  the  harm- 
less coloring  of  either  was  not  only  to  be  prohibited  but  to  be 
punished  by  fine  or  imprisonment  or  both?  There  can  be  but 
one  answer  to  these  questions.  When  the  legislature  attempts 
to  change  definitions  and  to  make  acts  criminal  which  per  se 
are  innocent  and  contain  no  element  of  wrong,  there  must  be 
something  in  the  title  to  show  such  purpose  or  object  under 
Sec.  20,  Art.  4  of  the  constitution.  The  title  contains  not  even 
an  intimation  that  an  entirely  innocent  act  is  to  be  made  a 
crime.     It  follows  that  this  part  of  the  act  is  void. 

Bissel  V.  Wayne  Probate  Judge,  58  Mich.  237. 
Northwestern  M'fg.  Co.  v.  Wayne  Circuit  Judge,  Id., 

381. 
McKellar  v.  Detroit,  57  Mich.,  158. 

This  statute  is  assailed  as  unconstitutional  upon  other 
grounds.  This  disposal  of  the  case  renders  it  unnecessary  to 
discuss  them.  How  far  the  legislature  may  go,  under  the  police 
power  inherent  in,  the  State  in  prohibiting  and  punishing  acts 
which  in  themselves  are  perfectly  harmless,  would  be  an  inter- 
esting subject  of  injuiry,  but  as  it  is  not  necessary  to  a  dis- 
posal of  the  case  we  decline  to  enter  upon  it. 

Judgment  affirmed.    The  other  justices  concurred. 


140  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


PEOPLE  V.  SKILLMAN. 

(Opinion  filed  March  4,  1902.) 

Pure  Food  Law — ^Section  5022  C.  L.  Construed — Action  Against 
Traveling   Salesman. 

A  traveling  salesman  for  a  wholesale  grocery  firm,  residing  out 
of  the  State,  took  an  order  in  this  State  for  pure  fruit  jelly 
and  forwarded  the  order  to  his  employers.  The  order  was 
filled  with  imitation  fruit  jelly.  Information  was  filed 
against  the  salesman  under  section  5022  C.  L.,  regulating 
the  manufacture  and  sale  of  imitation  fruit  jellies.  Held, 
That  respondent  was  not  guilty  of  violating  the  terms  of 
the  statute. 

Error  to  the  circuit  court  for  Muskegon  County.  Fred  J. 
Russell,  judge. 

Appeal  of  John  Skillman  from  a  conviction  under  the  pure 
food  law.    New  trial  ordered. 

Charles  B.  Cross,  Prosecuting  Attorney,  for  the  people. 

Elliott  O.  Grosvenor  and  Smedley  &  Corwin,  for  respondent. 

Moore,  J.:  An  information  was  filed  against  the  respondent 
which,  omitting  the  formal  parts,  reads  as  follows:  "That  one 
John  Skillman  heretofore,  to  wit,  on  the  sixteenth  day  of 
September,  A.  D.,  1901,  at  the  city  of  Muskegon,  in  the  county 
of  Muskegon  aforesaid,  did  unlawfully  offer  for  sale  and  did 
sell  to  Albert  Towle  a  large  quantity,  to  wit:  a  certain  com- 
pound under  the  name  of  Quince  Jelly  which  was  then  and 
there  adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  the  Act  No.  193  of 
the  Public  Acts  of  the  State  of  Michigan  of  the  year  1895,  as 
amended  by  Act  No.  118  of  the  Public  Acts  of  the  State  of 
Michigan  of  the  year  1897,  as  amended  by  Act  No.  117  of  the 
Public  Acts  of  the  State  of  Michigan  of  the  year  1899,  in  this, 
to  wit:  That  said  compound  was  then  and  there  made  and  com- 
posed in  part  of  glucose,  starch  and  other  substances,  and  was 
then  and  there  colored  in  imitation  of  fruit  jelly  contrary  to  the 
form  of  the  statute." 

After  the  testimony  was  all  in,  a  motion  was  made  asking 
the  judge,  for  various  reasons,  to  direct  a  verdict  in  favor  of 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  141 

respondent.  This  motion  was  overruled.  The  case  was  suh- 
mitted  to  the  jury  which  returned  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

A  great  many  errors  are  assigned.  We  think  some  of  them 
which  we  shall  discuss  are  well  taken,  but  as  the  case  if  ever 
tried  again,  will  not  present  the  same  questions  now  presented 
by  counsel  we  deem  it  unnecessary  to  pass  upon  all  the  ques- 
tions argued  by  them  in  the  briefs. 

To  sustain  the  case  of  the  people  testimony  in  substance  as 
follows  was  introduced:  It  was  shown  the  respondent  had  for 
some  years  been  a  traveling  salesman  in  the  employ  of  Reid, 
Murdock  &  Company  of  Chicago,  that  he  solicited  an  order  from 
Mr.  Towle,  a  grocer  in  Muskegon,  that  Mr.  Towle  gave  him  an 
order  for  a  case  of  assorted  pure  fruit  jelly.  Mr.  Skillman  did 
not  have  the  goods  with  him,  but  reduced  the  order  to  writing 
in  the  presence  of  Mr.  Towle,  at  his  store,  and  forwarded  it 
to  the  house  in  Chicago.    It  is  as  follows: 

"Reid,  Murdock  &  Co.,  Chicago. 
Sept.  12,  1901. 

Name:     Albert  Towle. 

Town :     Muskegon. 

State:     Michigan. 

Ship  by  Barry  Line. 

Salesman :     Skillman. 

1  c  P.  F.  Jell  Med  Asst  100 

1  c  P.  F.   Jelly  Med.   Currant    100 

60  days." 

"I  c  P.  F.  Jelly  Med.  Asst."  was  explained  to  mean  one  case 
pure  fruit  jelly  medium  size  assorted  glasses.  Mr.  Towle  testi- 
fied Mr.  Skillman  claimed  it  was  pure  fruit  jelly  for  which  he 
took  the  order,  and  that  was  what  he  intended  to  buy.  It  was 
not  shown  that  respondent  had  anything  further  to  do  with 
the  transaction  than  as  above  stated.  Later  a  case  of  goods 
was  received  from  Reid,  Murdock  &  Company  and  testimony 
was  given  tending  to  show  that  a  tumbler  of  this  jelly  was  sold 
to  Mr.  Bennett,  inspector  of  the  Dairy  and  Food  Department  of 
Michigan,  and  by  him  forwarded  to  the  State  Analyst,  where  it 
is  claimed  upon  analysis  it  was  shown  to  be  a  mixture  of  fruit 
juice,  glucose,  starch  and  coloring-matter.  Upon  the  cross  ex- 
amination of  Mr.  Towle  the  following  occurred: 


142  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

"Q.  Did  you  give  Mr.  Skillman  more  than  one  order  for 
fruit  jelly  about  this  time?  A.  Well,  he  had  two  or  three 
orders   I    think,   two   at   least. 

"Q.  Two  orders?  A.  One  of  them  might  have  been  ordered 
by  mail. 

"Q.  Now  you  received  two  consignments  of  fruit  jelly  from 
the  orders  you  had  given  to  Mr.  Skillman?  A.  I  think  so, 
yes,    sir. 

"Q.  Upon  which  one  of  these  orders  did  you  receive  this  par- 
ticular tumbler  of  jelly  that  you  afterwards  sold  to  Mr.  Ben- 
nett? A.  I  couldn't  say.  The  one  that  he  bought  was  out  of 
that  order   I   think.      (Witness  pointing  to  order  exhibited.)" 

The  defense  claimed  that  the  label  "pure  fruit  jelly"  placed 
upon  the  tumbler  analyzed  was  put  there  by  mistake.  It  was 
their  claim  that  Reid,  Murdock  &  Company  dealt  in  two  kinds 
of  jelly,  those  made  out  of  pure  fruit  and  those  made  in  imita- 
tion of  pure  fruit,  and  that  when  the  imitation  was  sold  in 
Michigan  and  certain  other  states  their  instructions  were  to 
label  them  "imitation,"  and  that  these  instructions  were  fur- 
nished in  writing  to  their  agents,  including  the  respondent, 
and  they  offered  testimony  tending  to  prove  this  claim.  The 
written  instructions  were  also  offered  in  evidence,  but  with 
the    testimony    offered    were    excluded    by    the    court. 

Among  other  requests  offered  by  the  respondent  was  the 
following: 

"Under  the  undisputed  evidence  in  this  case  there  is  nothing 
to  show  that  the  respondent  offered  to  sell  any  jelly  in  viola- 
tion of  any  statute  of  this  State,  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  is 
shown  that  respondent  offered  to  sell  strictly  pure  fruit  jelly 
and  sent  such  an  order  to  Reid,  Murdock  &  Company,  of  Chi- 
cago, Illinois,  and  the  charge  in  the  information  for  selling  and 
offering  to  sell  adulterated  jelly  is  not  sustained  by  the  evi- 
dence, and  your  verdict  should  be  not  guilty." 

The  judge  refused  to  give  this  request,  but  charged  the  jury, 
"It  is  recognized  by  the  legislators  and  is  a  matter  of  common 
knowledge  that  many  of  the  wholesalers  that  are  doing  busi- 
ness in  Michigan  are  not  residents  of  this  State,  so  the  legisla- 
ture saw  fit  to  make  a  law  where  a  man  solicited  the  sale  of 
pure  jellies,  took  an  order  for  the  sale  of  pure  jellies,  and   in 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  143 


response  to  that  order  and  offer,  a  different  class  of  goods  was 
furnished,  that  the  party  should  be  guilty  of  violating  this 
particular  law.  In  other  words,  instead  of  that  ord€r  or  offer 
and  the  furnishing  of  goods  delivered  to  the  party  by  a  party 
who  might  be  a  non-resident  of  the  State,  that  it  should  relate 
to  the  man  who  actually  made  the  offer,  the  man  who  actually 
took  the  order  for  the  furnishing  of  this  particular  article.  The 
people  claim  that  this  is  the  matter  in  which  this  defendant 
here  is  liable." 

This  statement  of  the  law  is  sought  to  be  justified  by  People 
V.  Snowberger,  113  Mich.  86,  and  People  v.  Grocer  Co.,  118  Mich. 
604,  71  N.  W.  497,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  449,  77  N.  W.  315.  A  refer- 
ence to  these  cases  will  show  that  the  respondent  in  each  of 
them  admitted  making  the  sale  of  the  goods.  In  this  case  the 
respondent  denies  that  he  sold  any  goods  coming  within  the 
provisions  of  the  statute.  Giving  the  only  interpretation  to 
the  testimony  as  it  appears  in  the  record  which  can  be  fairly 
given  to  it  shows  Mr.  Towle  was  solicited  to  give  an  order  for 
pure  fruit  jelly.  He  gave  such  an  order.  It  was  reduced  to 
writing  and  in  the  writing  the  jelly  was  described  as  pure  fruit 
jelly.  As  before  stated  the  only  connection  of  the  respondent 
with  the  transaction  as  shown  by  the  record  is  the  taking  of  an 
order  for  an  article  not  within  the  terms  of  the  statute  and 
forwarding  it.  This  does  not  constitute  an  offense.  It  might 
as  well  be  urged  that  if  a  traveling  salesman  takes  an  order 
for  Michigan  beet  sugar  and  forwards  a  written  order  for  such 
sugar,  and  if  the  house,  instead  of  filling  the  order  as  written, 
sends  glucose  with  a  label  upon  the  package  containing  it  call- 
ing it  Michigan  beet  sugar  the  salesman  would  be  guilty  of 
an  offense.  This  we  do  not  understand  to  be  the  law.  Upon 
the  case  as  made  the  circuit  judge  should  have  directed  a  ver- 
dict of  not  guilty.  People  v.  Howard,  50  Mich.  242,  15  N.  W. 
101. 

The  verdict  is  set  aside  and  a  new  trial  ordered. 

Long,  .T.,  did  not  sit.     The  other  justices  concurred. 


144  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


THE  PEOPLE  V.  MORSE. 

(Opinion  filed  June  3,  1902.) 

Pure  Food  Law^Sales  by  Agents — Criminal  Responsibility  for 
Acts  of  Principal. 

1.  A  traveling  salesman  who  in  good  faith  takes  an  order  for 
"pure  pepper,"  which  is  filled  by  his  principal  with  impure 
pepper,  is  not  guilty  of  a  violation  of  Public  Acts  1895,  No. 
193,  forbidding  the  sale  of  impure  foods. 

2.  Public  Acts  1895,  No.  193  (Pure  Food  Laws)  Sec.  17,  pro- 
viding that  the  taking  of  an  order  for  future  delivery  of 
any  of  the  articles  covered  by  the  "act  shall  be  deemed  a 
sale,  within  the  meaning  of  the  act,"  does  not  make  an 
agent  absolutely  responsible  for  the  acts  of  his  principal  in 
filling  the  orders  taken  by  such  agent,  and  an  order  by  the 
agent  which  is  filled  by  the  principal  as  an  entirety  may  be, 
under  the  act,  a  sale  of  impure  food,  as  to  the  principal, 
and  yet  not  such  as  to  the  agent. 

Error  to  circuit  court,  Muskegon  county;  Fred  J.  Russell, 
judge. 

John  W.  Morse  was  convicted  of  a  violation  of  the  pure  food 
law,  and  he  brings  error.     Reversed. 

Underwood  &  Umlor,  for  appellant. 

Chas.  B.  Cross,  Prosecuting  Attorney,  and  George  S.  Lovelace, 
Assistant  Prosecuting  Attorney,  for  the  people. 

Hooker,  J.:  The  brief  filed  on  behalf  of  the  people  states 
that  the  case  is  similar  to  that  of  The  People  v.  Skillman,  8 
Detroit  Legal  News,  1090,  89  N.  W.  330,  and  in  effect  concedes 
that  the  case  must  be  reversed  if  we  adhere  to  our  former  de- 
cision. 

The  defendant  took  an  order  for  some  pepper,  as  and  for 
pure  pepper,  to  be  shipped  to  a  dealer  in  Muskegon,  by  defend- 
ant's principal,  a  wholesaler  in  Chicago.  The  pepper  when  sent 
was  not  pure. 

It  is  insisted  that  the  Skillman  case  is  at  variance  with  the 
weight  of  authority  elsewhere,  and  contrary  to  our  own  cases, 
in  which  it  is  said  that  we  have  held  that  a  guilty  intent  on 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  145 


the  part  of  a  vendor,  Is  not  essential  to  an  offense,  under  the 
pure  food  law  (Public  Acts  1805,  No.  193).  It  is  further  said 
that  in  the  decision  in  the  Skillman  case,  section  seventeen  of 
the  act  must  have  been  overlooked  or  considered  unconstitu- 
tional. 

The  transaction  in  which  the  order  was  taken  did  not  in- 
volve an  immediate  delivery  of  pepper,  then  and  there  present. 
It  is  not  shown  that  the  sample,  if  there  was  one,  was  the  same 
as  the  pepper  subsequently  sent,  or  that  it  was  in  the  least 
impure.  If  it  be  conceded  that  the  agent  acted  in  good  faith, 
and  we  understand  that  it  is  not  questioned,  he  took  an  order 
for  pure  goods,  and  in  doing  that  certainly  committed  no 
offense.  It  is  now  urged  that  the  exigencies  of  the  enforce- 
ment of  this  law  are  such,  that  we  should  hold  that  this  inno- 
cent and  lawful  action,  may  be  made  a  crime  by  the  subsequent 
act  of  the  principal,  either  intentional  or  inadvertent,  in  de- 
parting from,  instead  of  performing  the  contract  which  his 
agent  had  innocently  made.  We  think  this  is  not  so,  and  we 
are  also  of  the  opinion  that  this  does  not  necessarily  do  vio- 
lence to  section  seventeen.  This  transaction,  as  an  entirety, 
may  have  been  a  sale  of  impure  pepper  under  the  statute  as 
to  the  principal,  and  not  as  to  the  agent.  If  the  order  had  been 
taken,  with  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  agent  of  a  practice 
to  send  impure  pepper  on  such  orders,  a  different  question 
would  be  presented. 

The  judgment  is   reversed  and  a  new  trial   ordered. 

Long,  J.,  did  not  sit.     The  other  justices  concurred. 


PEOPLE  V.  ROTTER. 

(Opinion  filed  June  24,  1902.) 

Food — Oleomargarine    Act — Constitutional    Law — Statutes— Title 

—Object. 

1.     Public  Acts  1901,  No.  22,  entitled  "An  act  to  prevent  decep- 
tion in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  imitation  butter,"  which 
in  addition  to  forbidding  sale  of  imitation  butter,  prohibits 
19 


146  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

sales  of  colored  oleomargarine,  is  not,  on  that  account,  open 
to  the  objection  that  the  object  is  not  expressed  in  the  title, 
as  required  by  Const.  Art.  4,  Sec.  20. 

2.  The   act  is  not  in   contravention   of  the   fourteenth   amend- 
ment of  the  federal  constitution. 

3.  The  act  is   a  valid  exercise  of  the  police  power. 

Error  to  circuit  court,  Emmet  county;  Frank  Shepard,  judge. 

George  W.  Rotter  was  convicted  of  selling  colored  oleomar- 
garine, and  brings  error.     Affirmed. 

Smedley  &  Corwin,  Sears,  Meagher  &  Whitney  (James  F. 
Meagher  and  Kay  Wood,  of  counsel),  for  appellant. 

Horace  M.  Oren,  Attorney  General,  and  Matthew  F.  Guinon, 
prosecuting  Attorney,  for  the  people. 

Hooker,  C.  J.:  At  its  last  session,  the  legislature  passed  an 
act  under  the  title,  "An  act  to  prevent  deception  in  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  imitation  butter."     Public  Acts  1901,  No.  22. 

Section  1  of  said  act  provides  that: 

"No  person,  by  himself  or  his  agents  or  servants,  shall  render 
or  manufacture,  sell,  offer  for  sale,  expose  for  sale,  or  have  in 
his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any  article,  product  or  com- 
pound made  wholly  or  in  part  out  of  any  fat,  oil  or  oleaginous 
substance  or  compound  thereof,  not  produced  from  unadulter- 
ated milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  which  shall  be  in  imitation 
of  yellow  butter  produced  from  pure  unadulterated  milk  or 
cream  of  the  same:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall 
be  construed  to  prohibit  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  oleomar- 
garine in  a  separate  and  distinct  form,  and  in  such  manner  as 
will  advise  the  consumer  of  its  real  character,  free  from  color- 
ation or  ingredient  that  causes  it  to  look  like  butter." 

Section  2  prescribes  a  penalty  for  the  violation  of  the  act. 

The  defendant  was  a  grocer  in  Emmet  county,  and  is  shown 
to  have  sold  a  package  of  oleomargarine,  which  by  an  analysis 
was  proven  to  have  contained  artificial  coloring  matter,  and 
that  said  oleomargarine  was  not  made  wholly  from  unadul- 
terated milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  and  that  it  was  made 
In  imitation  of  yellow  butter,  produced  from  unadulterated  milk 
or  cream  from  the  same.  The  court  was  asked  to  direct  a  ver- 
dict or  not  guilty  upon  the  grounds: 

1st.     That   the   object   of   the   act   was   not   expressed   in   the 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  147 

title,  as  required  by  section  20  of  article  4  of  the  constitution 
of  this  State; 

2d.  That  the  act  violates  the  fourteenth  amendment  of  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  article  6,  section  32,  of 
the  constitution   of  this   State; 

3d.     That  it  was  not  within  the  police  power  of  the  State. 

The  evidence  conclusively  shows  that  no  deception  was  used 
in  selling  the  oleomargarine,  and  there  is  nothing  to  indicate 
that  there  was  any  harmful  ingredient  therein,  but  that,  on  the 
contrary  there  was  not  such  ingredient.  The  defendant  was 
convicted,  and  the  case  is  here  on  exceptions  before  sentence. 

It  is  contended  that  the  title  to  the  act  indicates  that  the 
act  was  designed  to  prevent  deception  in  the  manufacture  and 
sale  of  imitation  butter,  while  the  act  attempts  to  go  further 
and  prevent  all  sales  of  such  colored  oleomargarine. 

If  oleomargarine  colored  yellow,  closely  resembles  yellow  but- 
ter, made  from  milk  or  cream,  it  cannot  reasonably  be  said  not 
to  resemble  or  imitate  yellow  butter.  Butter  is  a  well  known 
commodity.  From  time  immemorial  it  has  had  but  one  origin, 
viz.:  from  the  churning  of  milk  or  cream.  Whatever  may  be 
said  of  the  possibility  of  making  a  product  from  other  com- 
pounds than  milk  or  cream  that  shall  closely  resemble  or  be 
chemically  identical  with  butter,  the  world  has  but  one  under- 
standing of  what  is  meant  by  the  word  "butter,"  and  we  must 
assume  that  such  is  the  sense  in  which  our  legislature  used  the 
term.     Compiled  Laws,  Sec.  50,  Sub.  1. 

A  fair  inference  from  this  statute  is  that  the  legislature  un- 
dertook to  prevent  deception,  by  preventing  the  sale  of  any 
yellow  oleomargarine,  and  it  undertook  to  accomplish  this  by 
the  most  effective  means,  viz.:  by  prohibiting  the  coloring  of 
oleomargarine  yellow,  thereby  avoiding  the  embarrassment 
which  would  otherwise  arise  from  the  necessity  of  proving  in 
each  case,  that  deceit  was  used  in  selling  it,  as  and  for  but- 
ter. We  think  this  is  fairly  within  the  title,  whatever  must 
be  said  of  the  other  points  raised.  We  are  referred  to  the  case 
of  N.  W.  Mfg.  Co.  V.  Chambers,  58  Mich.  381,  25  N.  W.  372, 
55  Am.  Rep.  693,  as  conclusive  upon  this  question,  in  which 
case  it  is  said  that  "all  that  could  be  done  under  such  a  title 
would   be  to  prohibit  and   prevent   sale  of  such   articles   under 


148  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


false  pretenses."  We  are  of  the  opinion  that  this  language  is 
too  restrictive,  and  that  it  is  at  variance  with  the  settled  doc- 
trine in  this  State,  that  any  provision,  naturally  calculated  to 
accomplish  the  object  expressed  in  the  title  may  be  included 
in  the  act. 

See: 

Soukup  V.  VanDyke,  109  Mich.,  681. 

People  V.  Worden  Grocer  Co.,  118  Mich.,  607. 

The  case  cited  was  rightly  disposed  of  upon  another  ground, 
and  it  is  possible  that  the  language  above  quoted  should  be 
considered  a  dictum.  Moreover,  the  cases  are  distinguishable 
for  whereas,  that  act  attempted  to  prevent  all  sales  of  imitation 
butter,  and  was  therefore  perhaps  inconsistent  with  the  title, 
which  apparently  contemplated  lawful  sales,  the  statute  under 
consideration  in  the  present  case,  does  not  prohibit  sales  of 
oleomargarine,  which  is  not  tainted  with  the  prohibited  in- 
gredients. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  discuss  the  other  points  at  length  for 
the  reason  that  the  uniform  trend  of  judicial  opinions  is  that 
such  laws  are  valid: 

State  V.  Meyers,  42  W.  Va.  825;  35  L.  R.  A.  844. 

New  Hampshire  v.  Marshall,  I.  L.  R.  A.  51. 

Powell  V.  Penna,  127,  U.  S.  678. 

People  V.  Armsberg,  105  N.  Y.   113. 

Butler  V.  Chambers,  36  Minn.  69. 

People  V.  Worden  Grocer  Co.,  118  Mich.  604. 

People  V.  Armsberg,  105  N.  Y.  123. 

State  V.  Crescent  Creamery  Co.,  86  N.  W.  107. 

State    V.   Ball,    46  Atl.  Rep.   50 

Commonwealth  v.  Van  Dyke,   13  Pa.    Sup.  Ct.  Rep. 

484. 
Commonwealth  v.  McCann,  14  Pa.  Supt.  Ct.  Rep.  221. 
Armour  Packing  Co.  v.  Snyder,  84  Fed.  Rep.  136. 
Cap.  City  Dairy  Co.  v.  State,  22  Sup.  Ct.  Rep.  120. 
Wright  V  State,  41  Atl  Rep.  795. 

We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  legislature  had  the  power  to 
pass  this  law,  and  its  wisdom  of  policy  is  not  for  our  considera- 
tion. 

The  judgment  is  affirmed  and  the  court  directed  to  sentence 
the   defendant. 

Long,   J,,   did   not  sit.     The  other  justices  concurred. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  149 

PEOPLE  V.  PHILLIPS. 

(Opinion  filed  Sept.  17,  1902.) 

Pood — Adulteration — Statutes — Oleoinargarine — Yellow    Butter. 

1.  The  phrase  "yellow  butter,"  is  used  in  Act  No.  22,  Acts  1901, 
making  it  an  offense  to  sell  or  offer  for  sale  oleomargarine 
colored  in  imitation  of  '-yellow  butter"  made  from  pure 
milk  or  cream,  of  the  same,  means  any  butter  produced 
from  pure  milk  or  cream  thereof  having  a  "perceptible 
shade"  of  yellow. 

Error  to  circuit  court,  Kalamazoo  county;  John  W.  Adams, 
judge. 

John  W.  Phillips  was  convicted  of  selling  oleomargarine,  in 
violation  of  Act  No.  22,  Acts  1901,  and  he  brings  error.  Affirmed. 

Frank  E  Knappen  and  E.  M.  Irish,  for  appellant. 

Sheridan  F  Master,  Prosecuting  Attorney,  and  Dallas  Boude- 
man,  for  the  people. 

Moore,  J.:  The  respondent  was  convicted  of  having  on  hand 
with  intent  to  sell,  and  offering  for  sale  oleomargarine,  colored 
in  imitation  of  yellow  butter,  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  Act 
No.  22  of  the  legislature,  passed  at  the  session  of  1901. 

It  is  claimed  by  respondent  this  law  is  unconstitutional  and 
is  an  invalid  law.  That  question  was  decided  in  the  very  recent 
case  of  People  v.  Rotter,  against  the  contention  of  respondent, 
and  need  not,  be  discussed  here.  It  is  urged  as  a  matter  of 
defense,  and  we  quote  from  the  brief  of  counsel,  "that  the 
statute  is  only  aimed  against  the  imitation  of  a  substance  which 
the  legislature  recognizes  as  yellow  butter,  and 

1.  The  court  should  take  judicial  notice  that  all  butter  with 
a  trace  of  yellow  in  it  is  not  the  yellow  butter  of  commerce. 

2.  That  if  this  is  not  true  as  a  proposition  of  judicial  notice, 
and  the  court  cannot  know  it,  then  the  respondent  should  have 
been  allowed  to  prove,  if  he  could,  that  there  was  such  a  usage 
of  commerce. 

3.  That  the  statute  is  vague  and  indefinite  in  not  defining 
the  elements  of  the  statutory  crime  it  attempts  to  carve  out  of 


150  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

an  act  innocent  per  se,  in  that  it  gives  no  standard  for  deter- 
mining what  the  color  of  yellow  butter  is  that  is  not  to  be 
imitated." 

The  trial   judge   charged   the   jury   upon  that   branch   of   the 
case  as  follows: 

"It  is  not  necessary  in  this  case  for  the  people  to  have  proved 
that  the  respondent  himself  colored  the  oleomargarine  if  you 
find  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  that  it  was  colored.  The  offense 
is  just  as  complete,  so  far  as  this  is  concerned,  if  the  respond- 
ent purchased  oleomargarine  colored,  as  above  indicated.  The 
offense  as  above  stated  consists  of  having  the  oleomargarine 
colored  as  before  indicated,  in  his  possession,  with  intent  to  sell 
the  same,  or  in  exposing  it  for  sale;  and  if  the  respondent  sold 
it  in  the  same  condition  as  he  bought  it,  there  would  be  no 
defense  in  this  case.  The  respondent,  gentlemen  of  the  jury, 
is  not  charged  in  this  information  with  selling  this  article; 
and  if  you  find  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  he  sold  it  as  claimed 
by  the  people  in  the  testimony  offered,  you  may  consider  this 
fact  on  the  question  of  whether  respondent  had  or  did  not  have 
the  article  in  his  possession  for  the  purpose  of  selling  it.  And 
you  must  not  consider  it  for  any  other  purpose.  If  you  find  be- 
yond a  reasonable  doubt  that  respondent  did  sell  the  article 
mentioned  in  the  information  to  the  parties  claimed  by  the 
people,  that  would  satisfy  the  statute  upon  the  question  of  in- 
tent to  sell.  It  is  not  necessary  in  this  case  to  entitle  the  people 
to  a  conviction,  that  the  oleomargarine  should  have  been  colored 
to  represent  any  particular  kind  of  yellow  butter.  That  is,  such 
yellow  butter  as  the  statute  mentions,  and  as  I  have  indicated 
to  you  the  statute  mentions.  If  the  coloring  was  put  into  it, 
and  by  using  such  coloring  the  oleomargarine  was  in  imitation 
of  light  yellow  butter,  such  as  the  statute  mentions,  that  is 
yellow  butter  produced  from  pure,  unadulterated  milk  or  cream 
from  the  same,  the  offense  is  committed  just  the  same,  as  if  it 
had  been  colored  to  represent  darker  yellow  butter.  If  you  find 
it  to  have  been  oleomargarine  and  was  colored  in  such  a  man- 
ner as  to  be  in  imitation  of  any  kind  of  yellow  butter,  that 
would  satisfy  the  statute  upon  the  requirement  of  the  question 
of  color.  Yellow  butter  I  define  to  be  any  butter  produced  from 
pure,  unadulterated  milk  or  cream  of  the  same  having  a  yellow 
color. 

"It  is  necessary  in  order  for  the  jury  to  convict  the  respond- 
ent, for  you  to  find  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt  that  the  article 
in  the  package  sold  was  colored  in  imitation  of  yellow  butter 
produced  from  pure,  unadulterated  milk  or  cream  of  the  same. 
If  you  find  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  under  the  testimony  in 
this   case  that  there  was  some  coloring  matter  in   this   article 


J 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  151 

still  if  you  find  that  there  was  not.  enough  coloring  matter  in 
this  article  to  cause  it  to  look  like  yellow  butter  having  a  per- 
ceptible shade  of  yellow,  said  butter  having  been  produced  from 
unadulterated  milk,  or  cream  from  the  same,  then  you  must 
acquit.  But  if  you  find  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  there  was 
coloring  matter  in  said  article  and  sufficient  coloring  matter  in 
said  article  and  sufficient  coloring  matter  therein  to  make  it 
look  like  yellow  butter,  having  any  perceptible  shade  of  yellow, 
said  butter  having  been  made  from  unadulterated  milk  or  cream 
from  the  same,  that  would  be  sufficient  so  far  as  the  require- 
ment of  the  statute  upon  the  question  of  coloration  is  con- 
cerned." 

We  think  this  was  a  proper  construction  of  the  language  used 
in  the  statute. 

The  conviction  is  affirmed  and  the  case  remanded  for  further 
proceedings. 

Long,  J.,  did  not  sit.     The  other  justices  concurred. 


PEOPLE  V.  JENNINGS. 

(Opinion  filed  April  7,  1903.) 

Adulteration    of   Food — Omission   of   Ingredients — Coloring   Mat- 
ter— Remarks  of  Court. 

1.  There  not  having  been  incorporated  in  the  pure  food  law 
of  1895  (Public  Acts  of  1895,  p.  358,  No.  193),  any  specific 
formula  for  the  manufacture  of  lemon  extract,  it  is  proper 
to  resort  to  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  formula  to 
determine   of  what  lemon  extract  consists. 

2.  The  pure  food  law  of  1895  (PubUc  Acts  of  1895,  p.  358,  No. 
193),  is  not  intended  to  prevent  manufacturers  of  articles  of 
food  from  improving  the  same,  so  long  as  no  infringement 
of  the  law  or  spirit  of  the  act  defining  adulteration  takes 
place. 

3.  The  provisions  of  Comp.  Laws,  Sec.  5012,  that  an  article 
shall  be  deemed  adulterated,  "second,  if  any  inferior  or 
cheaper  substance  or  substances  have  been  substituted 
wholly  or  in  part  for  it;  third,  if  any  valuable  or  necessary- 
constituent  or  ingredient  has  been  wholly  or  in  part  ab- 
stracted from  it" — should  be  read  together,  and  the  provi- 
sion first  recited  construed  as  prohibiting  the  substitution 
for  an  essential  ingredient  of  any  cheaper  or  inferior  sub- 
stances. 


152  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

4.  Comp.  Laws,  Sec.  5012,  declaring  that  an  article  shall  be 
deemed  adulterated,  "sixth,  if  it  is  colored  *  *  *  where- 
by damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed,  or  if  by  any  means 
it  is  made  to  appear  better  or  of  greater  value  than  it  really 
is,"  does  not  preclude  the  use  of  coloring  matter  not  in- 
jurious to  health  in  any  way. 

5.  It  is  improper  for  the  court  to  refer  to  expert  testimony  as 
"boughten  testimony." 

Exceptions  from  circuit  court,  Muskegon  county;  Fred  J.  Rus- 
sell, judge. 

Charles  W.  Jennings  was  convicted  of  violating  the  pure  food 
law,  and  brings  exceptions.     Reversed. 

Charles  A.  Blair,  Attorney  General,  and  Charles  B.  Cross, 
Prosecuting  Attorney,  (Cross,  Lovelace  and  Ross,  of  counsel), 
for  the  people. 

Knappen,  Kleinhans  &  Knappen  and  L.  N.  Keating,  for  de- 
fendant. 

Mortgomery,  J.  This  is  a  prosecution  under  the  Pure  Food 
Law,  so  called.  The  defendant  was  convicted  under  an  informa- 
tion charging  him  with  selling  a  compound  as  a  lemon  extract 
■which  was  adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  Act  No.  193,  P. 
A.  1895,  and  was  a  compound  in  imitation  of  extract  of  lemon. 
The  respondent  was  convicted  and  brings  the  case  up  on  excep- 
tions before  sentence. 

The  evidence  on  the  trial  introduced  by  the  defendant  tended 
to  show  that  lemon  oil  contains  from  three  to  ten  per  cent 
citral,  so  called,  and  upwards  of  ninety  per  cent  of  so  called 
turpenes;  that  these  turpenes  represent  the  oil  property;  that 
they  are  in  reality  the  oil  itself  freed  from  the  citral;  that 
citral  is  the  principal  flavoring  and  odor-bearing  property  of 
lemon  oil;  that  the  tendency  of  turpenes  in  the  oil  of  lemon  is 
to  deteriorate  or  become  rancid  by  long  standing,  and  that 
because  of  this  the  extract  of  spirits  of  lemon  in  which  turpenes 
appear  in  usual  quantities  become  turpentiney,  both  in  smell 
and  taste,  and  that  for  this  reason  it  is  undesirable  to  have 
turpenes  present;  that  the  turpenes  have  a  biting  taste,  easily 
developing  a  turpentine  taste,  not  the  true  flavor  of  the  lemon 
fruit.      There    was    also    testimony    tending    to    show    that    this 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  153 


fact  created  a  demand  for  turpeneless  oils  and  that  turpeneless 
lemon  oils  had  been  manufactured  and  sold  commercially  for 
a  considerable  time. 

On  th€  part  of  the  prosecution  the  testimony  of  the  chemist 
of  the  Pure  Food  Department  was  to  the  effect  that  taking  as 
a  standard  of  extract  of  lemon  the  spirits  of  lemon  as  defined 
by  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  formula  that  the  extract 
produced  by  the  respondent  showed  no  lemon  oil  present.  It 
further  appears  that  spirits  of  lemon  made  according  to  the 
pharmacopoeia  formula  would  contain  from  25-100  to  35-100 
of  one  per  cent  of  citral.  It  also  appeared  that  30  per  cent 
ot  alcohol  appeared  in  the  product  made  by  respondent,  and 
that  according  to  the  pharmacopoeia  formula  80  per  cent  was 
used,  and  that  it  cost  less  to  make  the  extract  using  but  30 
per  cent  of  alcohol  than  if  80  per  cent  was  used.  It  was  also 
shown  that  a  trace  of  coal  tar  dye  was  found  in  the  extract 
made  by  respondent,  but  it  was  conceded  that  there  was  noth- 
ing whatever  injurious  in  the  extract  as  prepared  by  Mr.  Jen- 
nings. The  extract  sold  by  respondent  was  made  by  what  is 
known  as  the  shaking  out  process,  the  puri>ose  being  to  make 
an  extract  that  contains  no  oil  and  as  little  alcohol  as  possible, 
a  product  that  simply  contains  the  flavoring  properties  of  the 
lemon  oil  without  the  turpenes.  This  system  has  been  employed 
by  Mr.  Jennings  and  by  other  manufacturers  for  the  past  three 
years;  and  it  is  claimed  that  all  the  elements  and  properties 
of  lemon  oil  remained  except  the  turpenes,  and  the  testimony 
tended  to  show  that  the  complete  flavoring  qualities  are  ex- 
tracted by  this  process. 

The   circuit   judge  charged   the   jury  as   follows: 

"In  1895  the  Legislature  of  this  State,  thought  it  wise  to  pass 
a  law  relative  to  the  adulterations  of  food  and  food  products. 
Perhaps  there  may  have  been  some  amendments  since  that  time, 
but  that  was  the  foundation  of  the  law.  That  law  covers  lemon 
€xtract  as  it  covers  all  other  products  that  are  sold  on  the 
market.  It  seems  at  the  time  the  law  was  passed  and  since 
that  time  there  hasn't  been — there  isn't  incorporated  within 
that  law  any  special  formula  for  the  manufacture  of  lemon  ex- 
tract. Now,  we  can  hardly  say,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  that  at 
the  time  of  the  passage  of  that  law  that  the  Legislature  didn't 
have   some    recognized   and     defined    standard    by    which     these 


154  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

essences  or  extracts  should  be  governed  or  controlled.  I  think 
it  would  be  hardly  fair  to  the  Legislature  to  claim  that  there 
wasn't  a  standard  they  had  in  their  mind  at  that  time,  and  for 
the  purposes  of  this  case  I  will  instruct  you  gentlemen,  that 
at  that  time  and  at  this  time  this  standard  that  appears  here 
in  the  United  States  Pharmacopoeia  is  the  standard  recognized 
by  the  legislators  of  this  State  and  the  one  to  which — the  one 
that  is  in  force  so  far  as  it  applies  to  the  pure  Food  Law  of 
this  State  with  reference  to  that  particular  product.  And  if 
this  lemon  extract  is  manufactured  in  conflict  with  that  formula 
as  I  shall  hereafter  call  your  attention  to  it,  and  you  should 
find  from  the  evidence,  why  it  would  be  your  duty  to  convict 
the  defendant  here. 

"By  that  formula  it  appears  that  it  is  necessary  to  have  five 
per  cent  of  lemon  oil  in  the  lemon  extract  and  that  lemon  oil 
shall  be  cut  by  a  suflBcient  quantity  of  alcohol  to  perform  that 
act.  Of  course,  you  know  that  that  means  in  common  parlance 
it  should  dissolve  the  oil.  In  addition  to  that,  as  the  evidence 
tends  to  show  in  this  case,  after  those  things  are  put  together, 
the  fluid,  whatever  it  might  be,  would  be  nearly  the  color  of 
water.  As  coloring  there  may  be  or  should  be  five  per  cent  of 
lemon  rind,  and  those  ingredients  when  added  together  would 
be  lemon  extract,  and  that,  gentlemen,  will  be  the  "standard 
as  applied  to  the  Pure  Food  Law  of  this  State.  Now,  gentlemen, 
I  don't  mean  by  that  statement  that  lemon  extract  cannot  be 
manufactured  by  any  other  process  except  by  that  to  which 
I  have  called  your  attention.  I  don't  mean  that.  It  is  the  claim 
of  the  defendant  here  that  he  has  discovered  a  process  by  which 
he  can  manufacture  lemon  extract  containing  all  of  the  qualities 
that  lemon  extract  manufactured  according  to  that  formula 
would  possess  and  not  have  entirely  all  of  the  ingredients  in 
the  first  instance  that  are  provided  in  the  formula.  And  as 
I  view  this  case,  gentlemen,  that  is  one  of  the  important  propo- 
sitions in  connection  with  this  case — that,  and  the  question 
of  coloring — in  the  judgment  of  the  court  is  the  case,  and  that 
all  of  the  testimony  in  the  case  here  revolves  itself  about  those 
two  propositions. 

"It  is  the  claim  of  the  defendant,  as  I  say,  he  has  discovered 
a  process  by  which  he  can  produce  in  this  lemon  extract  all 
the  qualities  that  would  be  produced  by  adding  alcohol  and 
lemon  oil  together,  and  that  manufacturing  it  by  that  means 
he  produces  it  chemically  by  taking  a  larger  quantity  of  lemon 
oil  and  extracting  certain  parts  of  it.  Now,  gentlemen,  if  you 
find  and  are  satisfied  by  the  evidence  in  this  case  that  after 
this  lemon  extract  was  manufactured  as  defendant  here  claims 
he  did  manufacture  it  possesses  all  the  qualities  in  strength 
and  otherwise  that  it  would  possess  if  manufactured  according 
to  this  formula,  he  is  not  guilty  under  this   law.     That  is,  he 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  155 

is  not  guilty  of  manufacturing  an  impure  article,  unless  there 
are  certain  other  articles  that  enter  into  the  case  to  which  I 
call  your  attention.  As  I  say,  in  the  first  instance,  it  is  claimed 
that  according  to  the  formula  it  should  be  alcohol  and  five  per 
cent  of  lemon  oil.  Now  if  by  some  other  process  he  can  manu- 
facture from  the  lemon  oil  and  alcohol  a  product  that  would 
contain  all  of  the  elements  that  these  two  elements  would  con- 
tain if  so  mixed,  he  would  not  be  guilty  so  far  that  would  be 
lemon  extract  except  the  color  of  it. 

*'It  is  conceded  here  by  all  parties  in  interest,  I  think,  that 
the  only  object  of  the  lemon  peel  is  to  produce  coloring.  But 
there  is  another  element  to  which  the  prosecuting  attorney,  has 
called  our  attention.  The  evidence  tends  to  show,  gentlemen, 
that  if  this  product  is  produced  as  claimed  here  on  the  part 
of  the  defendant,  that  after  production  by  this  process  that  the 
product  will  be  nearly  white.  As  I  say,  if  it  contained  all 
of  the  elements  of  lemon  extract,  I  don't  think  he  would  be 
guilty  under  this  law,  and  if  you  are  so  satisfied,  of  course, 
at  that  point  it  would  be  your  duty  to  find  a  verdict  of  not 
guilty  unless  there  is  some  other  matter  in  which  he  has  vio- 
lated this  law. 

'There  is  another  provision  of  this  Pure  Food  Law  that  pro- 
vides that  ingredients  shall  not  be  colored.  In  this  case  it 
appears  that  after  this  fluid  substance  is  produced  which  he 
claims  is  just  the  same  as  produced  under  this  formula,  that 
he  desires  to  change  it  to  a  lemon  color.  In  other  words,  he 
puts  in  an  ingredient  which  he  claims  would  produce  the  same 
effect  as  this  lemon  rind.  What  is  the  object,  gentlemen,  or 
what  was  the  object  of  Mr.  Jennings  adding  this  color?  If  the 
object  was  by  any  means  to  make  it  appear  better  or  of  greater 
value  than  it  really  it;  if  that  was  the  object  in  adding  that 
product,  of  course  it  is  your  duty  without  any  question  to  find 
this  defendant  guilty,  because  he  hadn't  any  right  to  add  that 
kind  of  a  product  or  any  other  kind  of  a  product  to  this  fluid 
which  he  had  produced  and  sell  it  for  lemon  extract,  because 
that  is  a  direct  violation  of  one  of  the  provisions  of  this  Pure 
Food  Law." 

We  think  this  charge  presents  fairly  three  questions  for  con- 
sideration: First,  whether  the  pharmacopoeia  formula  is  to  be 
considered  as  defining  lemon  extract;  second,  if  so,  whether  an 
omission  of  ingredients  not  essential  to  its  purposes  as  a  food 
product  is  a  violation  of  the  statute;  third,  whether  the  instruc- 
tion relative  to  the  addition  of  coloring  matter  should  be  sus- 
tained. 

The   statute   defining   what   shall   be   deemed   adulteration,   so 


156  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

far  as  it  relates  to  this  case,  declares  that  an  article  shall  be 
deemed  adulterated  when:  "First,  if  any  substance  or  sub- 
stances have  been  mixed  with  it,  so  as  to  lower  or  depreciate 
or  injuriously  affect  its  quality,  strength  or  purity;  second,  if 
any  inferior  or  cheaper  substance  or  substances  have  been  sub- 
stituted wholly  or  in  part  for  it;  third,  if  any  valuable  or  neces- 
sary constituent  or  ingredient  has  been  wholly  or  in  part  ab- 
stracted from  it;  fourth,  if  it  is  in  imitation  of,  or  is  sold 
under  the  name  of  another  article;  *  *  *  gjxth,  if  it  is 
colored,  coated,  polished  or  powdered  whereby  damage  or  in- 
feriority is  concealed,  or  if  by  any  means  it  is  made  to  appear 
better  or  of  greater  value  than  it  really  is;  seventh,  if  it  con- 
tains any  added  substance  or  ingredient  which  is  poisonous  or 
injurious  to  health."     Complied  Laws,  Sec.  5012. 

We  are  agreed  with  the  circuit  judge  that  in  referring  to 
articles  of  food  and  to  protect  the  users  thereof  the  legislature 
must  have  had  in  view  some  standard,  and  as  lemon  essence 
or  lemon  extract  had  therefore  acquired  a  well-defined  meaning 
we  incline  to  the  view  that  it  is  proper  to  resort  to  the  phar- 
macopoeia formula  for  the  purpose  of  determining  what  lemon 
extract  consists  of.  Does  it  follow  from  this  that  the  legislature 
intended  to  prohibit  improvement  in  the  manufacture  of  lemon 
extract?  If  a  means  should  be  discovered  by  which  a  larger 
percentage  of  the  flavoring  quantity  of  the  lemon  might  be  ex- 
tracted would  it  be  an  infraction  of  this  law  that  the  manu- 
facturer should  use  such  larger  proportion  of  the  essential  in- 
gredient of  the  lemon  extract?  We  think  not.  We  think  it  is 
open  to  manufacturers  to  improve  a  common  article  of  food  so 
long  as  no  infringement  of  the  law  or  spirit  of  the  act  defining 
what  shall  be  deemed  adulteration  takes  place.  According  to 
the  proofs  offered  by  the  defendant  it  is  very  clear  in  the 
present  case  no  substance  or  substances  have  been  mixed  with 
this  extract  so  as  to  lower  or  depreciate  or  injuriously  affect 
its  quality,  strength  or  purity. 

As  to  the  second  condition  which  amounts  to  adulteration  the 
case  is  not  so  clear.  This  provides  that  if  any  inferior  or 
cheaper  substance  or  substances  have  been  substituted  wholly 
or  in  part  for  it,  that  it  shall  amount  to  adulteration.  We 
think,    however,    this    provision    should    be    read    in    connection 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  167 

with  the  siicce€dmg  one,  to-wit:  "If  any  valuable  or  necessary 
constituent  or  ingredient  has  been  wholly  or  in  part  abstracted 
from  it."  So  construed  the  provision  prohibiting  the  substitu- 
tion of  any  inferior  or  cheaper  substance,  wholly  or  in  part,  for 
it  means  the  substitution  for  an  essential  ingredient  of  such 
cheaper  or  inferior  substance.  Now  if  it  be  a  fact,  as  the  testi- 
mony on  the  part  of  the  respondent  tends  to  show,  that  it  is 
a  positive  advantage  to  exclude  the  turpene  wholly  from  the 
extract  and  to  lessen  the  quantity  of  alcohol  used,  then  the 
essential  ingredients  of  lemon  extract  have  not  had  substituted 
for  them  anything  inferior  or  cheaper.  We  are  aware  that  this 
view  of  the  law  may  make  it  more  difficult  to  establish  the  in- 
dividual case,  but  as  the  statute  is  a  penal  statute  it  should 
receive  a  strict  construction. 

It  follows  from  the  views  above  expressed  that  the  instruction 
of  the  learned  circuit  judge  was  erroneous  inasmuch  as  the 
jury  were  told  in  effect  that  if  any  ingredient  of  lemon  essence 
as  defined  by  the  pharmacopoeia  was  wanting  in  this  extract 
sold  by  the  respondent  that  there  should  be  a  conviction.  We 
think  the  instruction  should  have  been  that  if  the  lemon  ex- 
tract sold  by  respondent  contained  all  the  ingredients  and  in 
quantities  such  as  prescribed  by  the  pharmacopoeia  which  are 
adapted  to  use  as  food,  and  that  nothing  was  eliminated  except 
such  ingredients  as  could  be  dispensed  with  without  injury  to 
the  product  as  a  food  product  there  was  no  violation  of  the 
statute. 

The  only  other  provision  of  the  statute  involved  is  the  sixth, 
which  in  effect  prohibits  coloring  the  article  produced  whereby 
damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed.  The  instruction  upon  this 
branch  of  the  law  was  also  erroneous  if  we  are  correct  in  our 
view  of  the  main  question.  The  elimination  of  non-essential 
ingredients  from  the  extract  certainly  does  not  show  damage  or 
inferiority,  and  as  the  conceded  facts  are  that  the  coloring 
matter  employed  was  not  injurious  to  health  in  any  way  this 
provision  has  no  application. 

The  other  questions  discussed  do  not  require  special  mention. 
It  may  be  noted  in  passing  that  the  circuit  judge  in  referring 
to  the  testimony  of  expert  witnesses  spoke  of  it  as  boughten 
testimony.     We  think   this  expression  was   unfortunate.     While 


158  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

it  is  proper  for  the  jury  to  take  into  account  the  fact  that 
expert  witnesses  are  employed  at  an  extra  compensation  paid 
them,  the  implication  that  the  extra  compensation  necessarily 
amounts  to  a  purchase  of  their  testimony  is  hardly  warranted; 
while  the  jury  may  consider  this  fact  as  bearing  on  th€ir 
credibility,  it  is  not  proper  that  the  court  should  intimate  an 
opinion   of  that   character. 

The  judgment  should  be  reversed,  and  a  new  trial  ordered. 

The   other   justices   concurred. 


BENNETT  v.  CARR. 

(Opinion  filed  July  14,  1903.) 

Pure  Food  Law,  Act  22,  P.  A.  1901,  Construed— Sale  of  Yellow 
Oleomargarine. 

Act  No.  22  of  the  Public  Acts  of  1901  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
oleomargarine  except  where  it  is  "free  from  coloration  or  in- 
gredient that  causes  it  to  look  like  butter."  does  not  prohibit  the 
sale  of  oleomargarine  whose  color  is  natural,  genuine,  and  not 
an  imitation,  and  the  ingredients  themselves  naturally  produce 
the  color. 

The  term  "ingredient/'  used  in  Act  22,  Public  Acts  of  1901, 
does  not  refer  to  the  ingredients  essential  to  produce  the  article 
as  defined  by  the  legislature,  but  to  an  ingredient  used  to  pro- 
duce color. 

Certiorari  to  the  Circuit  Court  for  Muskegon  county,  Fred  J. 
Russell,  judge  to  review  an  order  denying  the  petition  of  John 
R.  Bennett  for  mandamus  to  compel  John  M.  Carr  to  issue  a 
warrant.     Order  affirmed. 

Charles  A.  Blair,  Attorney  General,  and  Cross,  Lovelace  and 
Ross,  for  relator  and  appellant. 

Smith,  Nims,  Hoyt  and  Erwin  for  defendant  and  appellee. 

Grant,  J.:  Relator  is  the  inspector  of  the  State  Food  and 
Dairy  Department.  On  the  24th  day  of  February,  1903,  he  made 
complaint  before  the  defendant,  a  justice  of  the  peace  of  the 
county  of  Muskegon,  charging  one  Martin  Aamondt  with  hav- 
ing sold  one  pound  of  oleomargarine  contrary  to  Act  No.  22  of 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  159 

the  Public  Acts  of  1901.  The  respondent  refused  to  entertain 
the  complaint  and  issue  warrant,  on  the  ground  that  the  com- 
plaint stated  no  offense  under  the  provisions  of  said  act,  and 
that  said  act  is  unconstitutional  and  void.  Relator  thereupon 
applied  to  the  circuit  court  for  the  county  of  Muskegon  for 
the  writ  of  mandamus  to  compel  the  respondent  to  issue  said 
warrant,  and  proceed  with  the  examination.  The  circuit  court 
sustained  the  action  of  the  respondent,  and  the  case  is  now 
l)efore  us  for  review  upon  certiorari. 

The   statute   in   question   reads   as  follows: 

"Section  1.  No  person,  by  himself  or  his  agents,  or  servants, 
shall  render  or  manufacture,  sell,  ofter  for  sale,  expose  for  sale, 
or  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any  article,  product 
or  compound  made  wholly  or  in  part  out  of  any  fat,  oil,  or 
oleaginous  substance  or  compound  thereof,  not  produced  from 
unadulterated  milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  which  shall  be  in 
imitation  of  yellow  butter  produced  from  pure  unadulterated 
milk  or  cream  of  the  same:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act 
shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  the  manufacture  or  sale  of  oleo- 
margarine *in  a  separate  and  distinct  form,  and  in  such  manner 
as  will  advise  the  consumer  of  its  real  character,  free  from 
coloration  or  ingredient  that  causes  it  to  look  like  butter."  The 
complaint  charges  Mr.  Aamondt  with  unlawfully  selling  one 
pound  of  oleomargarine  "made  wholly  or  in  part  of  fat,  oil,  or 
oleaginous  substance  or  compound  thereof,  as  follows,  to  wit: 

Water     ^  . . . .  11.75  per  cent 

Butter    fat 1 .  34  p€r  cent 

Beef  fat,  lard   and  cottonseed   oil..  79.24  per  cent 

Salt  and   other  mineral  matter 4.54  per  cent 

Curd     3.13  per  cent 

Said  article,  product  or  compound  not  being  then  and  there 
butter  produced  from  unadulterated  milk  or  cream  from  the 
same,  and  being  then  and  there  in  imitation  of  yellow  butter 
produced  from  unadulterated  milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  and 
not  being  then  and  there  oleomargarine  in  a  separate  and  dis- 
tinct form  and  in  such  manner  as  would  advise  the  consumer  of 
its  real  character,  free  from  coloration  or  ingredient  that  would 
cause  it  to  look  like  butter,  but  that  the  said  oleomargarine 
was  then  and  there  of  a  yellow  color  in  imitation  of  butter,  said 
color  not  being  then  and  there  produced  by  the  addition  of  any 


160  STATE    OP    MICHIGAN. 

artificial  coloring  matter,  but  said  color  being  produced  solely 
by  the  said  ingredients  therein  contained,  the  said  ingredients 
hereinbefore  set  forth,  having  been  selected  and  used  in  the 
manufacture  of  said  oleomargarine  in  such  manner  and  in  such 
quantities  and  proportion  as  to  produce  the  oleomargarine  that 
was  then  and  there  in  imitation  of  yellow  butter  produced  from 
unadulterated  milk  or  cream  from  the  same,  contrary  to  the 
form  of  the  statute,"  etc. 

The  oleomargarine  so  purchased  was  manufactured  in  the 
city  of  Chicago,  State  of  Illinois,  by  one  Moxley,  a  resident  of 
said  city,  and  was  sold  by  said  Moxley  to  said  Aamondt  in  the 
usual  course  of  trade,  and  by  said  Aamondt  was  sold  in  the 
usual  course  of  retail  trade,  in  the  same  form  and  condition 
and  in  the  original  package,  in  which  it  was  received  by 
Aamondt   from   Moxley. 

It  is  conceded  that  this  oleomargarine  has  a  yellow  color 
similar  to  butter,  but  the  color  is  not  produced  by  any  artificial 
coloring  substance  or  ingredient  used  for  the  purpose  of  colora- 
tion, but  is  produced  solely  by  the  selection  and  use,  in  proper 
proportions,  of  the  substantial,  recognized,  legal  and  necessary 
ingredients   of  commercial   oleomargarine. 

Does  the  complaint  state  an  offense  covered  by  the  statute? 
The  answer  depends  upon  the  construction  to  be  given  to  the 
statute.  The  relator  contends  that  the  statute  covers  all  pro- 
ducts which  look  like  yellow  butter,  and  that  it  is  immaterial 
whether  such  color  is  produced  by  some  ingredient  introduced 
for  the  purpose  of  causing  the  product  to  look  like  butter,  or 
whether  such  color  is  produced  by  authorized  and  legal  con- 
stituent food  ingredients.  The  respondent  contends  that  the 
statute  is  aimed  only  at  the  use  of  ingredients  used  solely  for 
the  purpose  of  producing  the  yellow  color,  and  does  not  pre- 
vent the  manufacture  of  an  article  whose  color  is  natural,  gen- 
uine and  not  an  imitation.  Penal  statutes  must  be  construed 
strictly  and  cannot  be  extended  by  construction  beyond  the  in- 
tent of  the  act  as  expressed  on  its  face.  The  conditions  exist- 
ing at  the  time  the  statute  was  enacted,  and  the  mischief  to  be 
remedied,  are  important  factors  in  construing  penal  statutes. 
Two  acts  covering  the  same  subject  must  be  construed  as  in 
pari  materia,  and,  if  possible,  effect  given  to  both.     These  are 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  161 


e'^mentary  rules  of  construction.  At  the'  time  the  statute  in 
(jiiestion  was  enacted  the  only  method  in  use  in  causing  oleo- 
margarine to  look  like  yellow  butter  was  the  introduction  of 
some  extraneous  coloring  matter.  This  was  the  mischief  to 
be  remedied.  We  clearly  so  understood  in  People  v.  Rotter, 
9  D.  L.  N.  284;  91  N.  W.  Rep.  167,  where,  speaking  through 
Chief  Justice  Hooker,  we  said  of  this  statute:  "The  statute 
under  consideration  *  *  *  does  not  prohibit  sales  of  oleo- 
margarine which  is  not  tainted  with  the  prohibited  ingredient." 

See  also  People  v.  Phillips,  9  Id.  393;   91  N.  W.  Rep.  616. 

The  legislature  has  defined  oleomargarine  which  may  be 
manufactured  and  sold  in  this  State.  Sec.  6,  Act  No.  147,  Pub- 
lic Acts  of  1891).  It  is  conceded  that  the  respondent  has  com- 
plied with  this  act.  If  we  give  the  enlarged  construction  to  the 
statute  now  in  question,  as  urged  by  the  relator,  it  follows  that 
the  legislature  has  prohibited  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  a 
valuable  article  of  food,  the  natural  color  of  which  resembles 
yellow  butter  (itself  almost  universally  colored  by  extraneous 
matter).  The  manufacturer  of  such  a  product,  if  he  sold  it  at 
all,  would  be  compelled  to  introduce  some  coloring  matter  so 
as  to  make  it  look  unlike  the  yellow  butter  of  commerce.  These 
two  statutes  must  be  construed  together.  The  article  sold  by 
the  respondent  is  clearly  authorized  by  the  first  act.  The  latter 
act  does  not  in  terms  prohibit  its  sale  and  manufacture.  It 
does  prohibit  the  use  of  any  substance  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
producing  yellow  color.  The  use  of  such  coloring  matter  was 
the  sole  mischief  then  known  to  exist,  and  the  only  danger  to 
be    apprehended    and    guarded    against. 

A  similar  statute  was  passed  in  New  Jersey,  and  the  like 
contention  was  made  to  support  a  conviction,  and  the  court 
said:  "To  construe  the  statute  so  broadly  would  render  it  prac- 
tically prohibitive  of  the  sale  of  all  oleomargarine;  for,  of 
course,  the  compound  must  derive  color  from  its  ingredients, 
and  such  a  prohibition  has  manifestly  not  been  declared." 

Ammon  v.  Newton,  14  At.  Rep.  610;   50  N.  J.  548. 
McCann  v.  Commonwealth,  48  At.  Rep.  470;    198  P. 
A.    St.    509. 


21 


162  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


Our  statute  is  copied  verbatim  from  that  of  Massachusetts. 
The  Supreme  Court  of  that  State,  in  a  case  just  decided,  has 
held  that  the  statute  applies  only  to  extraneous  substances  or 
ingredients  which  cause  the  product  to  look  like  butter,  and 
not  to  cases  where  the  ingredients  themselves  naturally  produce 
the  color. 

Commonwealth  v.   Himberg,  . 


The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  so  held  in  regard 
to  the  same  statute. 

Plumley  v.  Commonwealth,  155  U.  S.  461. 

The  term  "ingredient,"  used  in  the  statute,  does  not  refer 
to  the  ingredients  essential  to  produce  the  article  as  defined  by 
the  legislature,  but  to  an  ingredient  used  to  produce  color.  The 
maxim   noscitur   a  sociis   applies. 

Under  this  disposition  of  the  case  it  becomes  unnecessary  to 
discuss   any   constitutional   question. 

The  order   is   affirmed. 

The  other  justices  concurred. 


PEOPLE  V.   HARRIS. 

(Opinion  filed  December  1,  1903.) 

Fpod — Corn  Syrups — Glucose. 

1.  Public  Acts  1903,  No.  123  forbids  the  sale  of  cane  syrup  or 
beet  syrup  mixed  with  glucose,  unless  the  package  con- 
taining the  same  be  distinctly  branded  "Glucose  Mixture"  or 
"Com  Syrup,"  with  the  name  and  percentage  of  each  in- 
gredient contained  therein  plainly  stamped  thereon.  Held, 
That  a  sale  of  syrup  made  of  90  per  cent  pure  corn  syrup 
and  10  per  cent  cane  syrup,  labeled  "Victor  Corn  Syrup," 
and  truthfully  stating  the  ingredients  composing  it,  is  not 
in  violation  of  the  statute,  in  that  it  is  not  branded  "Glu- 
cose, 90  per  cent,  and  cane  syrup  10  per  cent." 

Exceptions  from  circuit  court,  Kent  county;  Willis  B.  Perkins, 
Judge. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  163 

Benjamin  S.  Harris  was  convicted  of  violating  the  "Act  in 
relation  to  the  sale  of  cora  syrup"  and  brings  exceptions.  Re- 
versed. 

Respondent  was  prosecuted  and  convicted  for  a  violation  of 
Act  No.  123  of  the  Public  Acts  of  1903,  entitled,  "An  act  in  rela- 
tion to  the  sale  of  corn  syrup,"  and  reading  as  follows: 

"Sec.  1.  No  person  shall  offer  or  expose  for  sale,  have  in  his 
possession  with  intent  to  sell,  any  cane  syrup,  beet  syrup,  or 
glucose,  unless  the  barrel,  cask,  keg,  can,  pail  or  package  con- 
taining the  same  be-  distinctly  branded  or  labeled  with  the  true 
and  appropriate  name;  nor  shall  any  person  offer  or  expose  for 
sale,  have  in  his  possession  with  intent  to  sell,  or  sell  any  cane 
syrup  or  beet  syrup  mixed  with  glucose  unless  the  barrel,  cask, 
keg,  can,  pail  or  package  containing  the  same  be  distinctly 
branded  or  labeled  'Glucose  Mixture'  or  'Corn  Syrup'  in  plain 
Gothic  type  not  less  than  three-eights  of  an  inch  square,  with 
the  name  and  percentage  by  weight  of  each  ingredient  con- 
tained therein  plainly  stamped,  branded  or  stenciled  on  each 
package  in  plain  Gothic  letters  not  less  than  one-quarter  of  an 
inch  square.  Each  and  every  package  of  syrup  either  simple  or 
mixed  shall  bear  the  name  and  address  of  the  manufacturer. 
Such  mixture  or  syrups  shall  have  no  other  designation  or 
brand  than  herein  required  that  represents  or  is  the  name  of 
any  article  which  contains  a  saccharine  substance;  and  all 
brands  or  labels  required  ^hall  be  an  inseparable  part  of  the 
general  or  distinguishing  label,  and  that  the  general  or  dis- 
tinguishing label  shall  be  that  principal  and  conspicuous 
sign  under  which  it  is  sold. 

'Sec.  2.  Whoever  shall  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things  pro- 
hibited, or  neglect  or  refuse  to  do  any  of  the  acts  or  things  re- 
quired by  this  act  or  in  any  way  violate  any  of  the  provisions, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  punished 
by  a  fine  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  nor  more  than  one 
hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a 
period  of  not  less  than  thirty  days  nor  more  than  ninety  days,  or? 
by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court." 

The  complaint  charges  him  with  the  unlawful  sale  of  "a  two- 
pound  can,  two  pounds,  of  a  certain  article,  product  and  con- 
pound,  to-wit:  corn  syrup,  so-called,  made  wholly  or  in  part 
of  cane  syrup  and  glucose  as  follows,  to-wit:  Cane  syrup  ten 
per  cent,  and  glucose  ninety  per  cent,  said  can  containing  said 
article,  product  and  compound  sold  as  aforesaid  not  being  then 
and  there  stamped,  branded  or  stenciled  with  the  name  and 
percentage  by  weight  of  each  ingredient  contained  therein,  to- 
wit:  cane  syrup  ten  per  cent,  glucose  ninety  per  cent;  but  said 
article,  product  and  compound  sold  as  aforesaid  was  then  and 
there  stamped  and  branded  as  follows,  to-wit:   'Cane  syrup  ten 


164  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


per  cent,  corn  syrup  ninety  per  cent,'  against  the  form  of  the 
statute  in  such  case  made  and  provided,  and  against  the  peace 
and  dignity  of  the  people  of  the  State  of  Michigan." 

Respondent  moved  to  quash  the  complaint  and  warrant  for 
two  reasons:  (1)  they  charged  no  offense;  (2)  the  act  author- 
izes the  use  of  the  words  "Corn  Syrup,"  instead  of  Glucose  in 
the  statement  of  the  ingredients  placed  upon  the  can.  The  mo- 
tion was  overruled  and  the  case  proceeded  to  trial  upon  the 
following  agreed  facts: 

1.  The  respondent  sold  on  October  12,  1903,  at  the  city  of 
Grand  Rapids,  Michigan,  the  can  of  Victor  Corn  Syrup  in  ques- 
tion. 

2.  The  label  on  said  can  of  syrup  sold,  as  stated  in  the  com- 
plaint, contains  the  formula  of  contents  of  said  can  as  follows: 
"Corn  syrup,  ninety  per  cent;  cane  syrup,  ten  per  cent;"  and  is 
not  branded  or  labeled  as  the  people  claim  it  should  be,  "Glu- 
cose, ninety  per  cent;  Cane  Syrup,  ten  per  cent." 

3.  The  Victor  Corn  Syrup  in  question  is  in  fact  composed  of 
ninety  per  cent  syrup  made  from  corn,  commercially  called 
Glucose  or  Corn  Syrup,  and  ten  per  cent  of  cane  syrup. 

4.  Glucose  contained  in  the  Victor  Corn  Syrup  in  question  is 
in  fact  a  pure  syrup  made   entirely  from  corn. 

5.  Grape  Sugar,  commercially  known  as  Glucose,  either  solid 
or  liquid,  is  a  generic  name  for  starch  sugar  as  distinguished 
from  the  cane  sugar. 

6.  A  simple  beet  syrup  is  evidently  the  same  as  the  simple 
cane  syrup. 

7.  Originally,  Glucose,  which  was  first  made  from  grapes, 
was,  for  the  reason  that  starch  sugars  are  identical  with  the 
sweet  principle  of  grapes,  termed,  for  a  great  many  years,  and 
until  lately  was  known  chemically  and  commercially  as  Grape 
Sugar. 

8.  Commercially,  Glucose  is  now  made  in  this  country  en- 
tirely from  corn,  although  abroad  it  is  still  made  from  potatoes. 

9.  The  consuming  public  does  not  understand  that  Glucose 
is  a  syrup  made  entirely  from  corn.  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
claimed  by  the  respondent  that  the  public  generally  supposes 
Glucose  to  be  an  inferior  product  made  from  animal  fat,  or  a 
product  of  the  glue  factory,  while  they  do  recognize  corn  syrup 
as  being  made  from  corn. 

10.  Glucose  as  made  from  corn  and  contained  in  Victor  Corn 
Syrup  in  question,  is  entirely  harmless  and  recognized  generally 
by  highest  authorities  as  a  valuable  food  product. 

11.  Glucose  made  from  corn,  in  fact,  costs  at  the  present 
time,  owing  partially  to  cost  of  raw  material,  more  to  produce, 
and  sells  for  more  in  the  markets,  than  manufactured  cane 
syrup. 

The  court  directed  a  verdict  of  guilty. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  165 


Grant,    J. 

Does  the  statute  require  respondent  or  manufacturers  to 
state  upon  their  labels  that  corn  syrup  consists  of  ninety  per 
cent  glucose?  No  such  statute  has  come  under  the  decision  of 
other  courts.  It  is  a  new  question,  and  must  be  determined 
upon  general  principles  of  construction. 

It  is  conceded  that  the  label  states  the  exact  facts;  that  the 
article  is  made  of  ninety  per  cent  pure  corn  syrup  and  ten  per 
cent  cane  syrup;  that  it  deceives  no  one;  that  Victor  Corn  Syrup 
is  a  valuable  and  pure  article  of  food,  and  that  the  ingredient 
ninety  per  cent  corn  syrup  "is  entirely  harmless,  and  recognized 
generally  by  the  highest  authority  as  a  valuable  food  product," 
whether  it  be  called  glucose  or  corn  syrup.  The  term  "Glucose" 
is  obnoxious  to  many,  if  not  a  majority,  of  the  public,  and  is 
misunderstood  by  them.  They  do  not  know  that  in  this  country 
glucose  is  now  made  entirely  from  corn,  and  that  the  terms 
glucose  and  corn  syrup  are  commercially  synonymous.  This 
fact  is  known  to  the  manufacturers  and  perhaps  the  dealers.  A 
prejudice  exists  against  the  term  ''glucose"  because  that  ma- 
terial can  be  manufactured  from  many  substances,  including 
sawdust.  In  Europe  it  is  made  mainly  of  potatoes.  By  many  it 
is  associated  with  a  glue  factory.  In  this  country  corn  syrup 
and  glucose  are  not  only  commercially  synonymous  terms,  but 
it  is  stated  by  counsel  for  respondent  that  they  are  permitted 
to  be  so  used  in  all  the  other  states.  We  have  not  verified  this 
statement,  but  as  it  is  not  challenged  we  assume  it  to  be  cor- 
rect. 

We  have,  therefore,  a  valuable  and  healthful  product,  made 
from  two  pure,  valuable  and  healthful  ingredients,  advertised 
and  placed  upon  the  markets  for  what  it  really  is,  without  any 
deception,  fraud  or  chance  to  injure  the  public  in  any  way.  Yet 
the  contention  on  behalf  of  the  people  is  that  the  legislature 
has  enacted  that  in  putting  this  product  upon  the  market  its 
manufacturers  and  sellers  must  attach  to  it  a  name  obnoxious 
to  the  public,  and,  in  fact,  calculated  to  deceive  them.  When 
it  is  claimed  that  such  innocent  acts  are  made  malum  pro- 
hibitum, there  must  be  either  an  express  .provision  of  the 
statute  so  declaring,  or  the  language  of  the  statute  must  leave 
no  other  conclusion  reasonable.  This  statute  does  not  expressly 
require  it. 

The  argument  on  behalf  of  the  people  in  "that  glucose  made 
from  corn  is  glucose,  the  simple  syrup  mentioned  in  and  in- 
tended to  be  mentioned  in  said  act."  The  further  claim  is  "that 
bad  there  been  any  intention  on  the  part  of  the  legislature  to 
use  the  terms  'glucose'  and  'corn  syrup'  interchangeably  and 
as  synonymous  then  the  term  'corn  syrup'  would  hav6  been 
enumerated  as  one  of  the  simple  syrups."  We  do  not  think 
this  reasoning  at  all  conclusive.     Prior  to  the  enactment  of  this 


166  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


statute  the  law  prohibited  the  sale  of  molasses,  syrup  or  glu- 
cose unless  distinctly  branded  or  labeled  with  its  true  and  ap- 
propriate name, — or  any  mixture  thereof,  unless  it  was  branded 
or  labeled  "glucose  mixture,"  and  the  per  cent  in  which  glucose 
entered  into  its  composition.  C.  L.,  Sec.  5024.  The  present  act 
which  repeals  the  provisions  of  the  former  act  expressly  per- 
mits the  mixture  to  be  labeled  "glucose  mixture,"  or  "corn 
syrup," -and  forbids  mixtures  or  syrups  to  have  any  other  desig- 
nation than  required  in  the  act  so  far  as  such  designation  "rep- 
resents or  is  the  name  of  any  article  which  contains  saccharine 
substance."  It  is  a  fair  presumption  that  the  legislature,  in 
enacting  this  law,  recognized  the  obnoxious  character  of  the 
term  "glucose"  among  the  people,  and  permitted,  and  intended 
to  permit,  a  mixture  of  corn  syrup  and  cane  syrup  to  be  sold 
under  the  name  of  Corn  Sprup.  The  title  to  the  act  provides 
for  the  sale  of  corn  syrup,  and  in  its  body  provides  that  when 
cane  syrup  is  mixed  with  it,  the  manufacturers  and  dealers 
shall  state  the  proportionate  ingredients.  The  smaller  amount 
of  cane  syrup  used  does  not  change  the  character  of  the  general 
product,  any  more  than  salt  changes  the  character  of  bread, 
or,  sugar  that  of  cake,  and  the  act  permits  the  sale  of  the  mix- 
ture as  corn  syrup.  Syrup,  as  defined  by  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture,  "is  the  product  obtained  by  purify- 
ing and  evaporating  the  juice  of  a  sugar  producing  plant  with- 
out removing  any  of  the  sugar."  Syrup  thus  obtained  from 
cane  is  cane  syrup;  syrup  so  obtained  from  sorghum  is  sorghum 
syrup,  and  syrup  so  obtained  from  corn  is  corn  syrup.  There 
is  no  reason  why  corn  syrup  should  be  labeled  glucose,  and 
until  the  legislature  have  so  ordered  in  language  susceptible 
of  no  other  construction,  the  law  must  be  held  not  to  bear  that 
construction. 

Conviction  reversed,  and  respondent  discharged. 

Hooker,  C.  J.,  took  no  part  in  the  decision.  The  other  justices 
concurred. 


PEOPLE  v.  HINSHAW. 

(Opinion  filed  January  5,  1904.) 

Pure    Food    Law — Adulterated    with    Harmless    Ingredients — Act 
193,  P.  A.  1895,  construed. 

The  coloration  of  '"Extract  of  Vanilla"  with  any  substance 
to  give  it  the  appearance  of  greater  strength  is  a  violation  of 
the. pure  food  law,  even  though  such  coloring  matter  is  harm- 
less. 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  167 


Act  193,  P.  A.  1895,  as  amended  by  Act  118,  P.  A.  1897,  held 
constitutional. 

Error  to  the  circuit  court  for   Saginaw  county;   B.  A.  Snow^ 

judge. 

Appeal  of  Emory  H.  Hinshaw  from  a  conviction  under  the 
pure  food  law.     AflB.rmed. 

Charles  A.  Blair,  Attorney  General,  and  Frank  A.  Rockwith, 
Jr.,  and  C.  M.  Browne,  for  the  people. 
Eugene  Wilber  for  respondent  and  appellant. 

Respondent  was  prosecuted  and  convicted  of  the  unlawful 
sale  of  "Extract  of  Vanilla,  which  was  then  and  there  adulter- 
ated within  the  meaning  of  act  number  193  of  the  Public  Acts 
of  the  State  of  Michigan  of  the  year  1895,  as  amended  by  act 
number  118  of  the  Public  acts  of  1897,  in  this,  to  wit:  That 
said  extract  of  Vanilla  was  colored  by  the  addition  of  a  foreign 
coloring  matter,  to  wit:  coal  tar  dye,  whereby  its  inferiority 
was  concealed,  and  whereby  said  Extract  of  Vanilla  was  made 
to  appear  better  and  of  greater  value  than  it  really  was." 

Two  errors  are  assigned. — (1)  that  the  court  erred  in  instruct- 
ing the  jury;  (2)  that  the  act  is  unconstitutional  as  repugnant 
to  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States. 

Grant,   J.:     I.     The  instruction   complained   of   is   as   follows: 

"Now  before  the  inferiority  of  an  article  can  be  concealed 
it  must  be  necessarily  first  ascertained  as  to  whether  or  not 
there  is  an  inferiority  in  the  article.  If  it  is  an  inferior  article 
and  that  inferiority  is  concealed  by  reason  of  the  addition  of 
foreign  substance  in  this  vanilla,  and  you  are  satisfied  from 
the  proof  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  of  the  fact,  then  he  would 
be  guilty,  although  he  had  no  knowledge  as  to  the  foreign  sub- 
stance being  in  the  bottle." 

It  appears  that  no  such  claim  was  made  on  behalf  of  re- 
spondent upon  the  trial;  no  request  was  asked  covering  the 
points  now  raised.  The  only  objections  shown  by  the  record 
to  have  been  made  are. — first,  that  the  title  is  not  broad  enough 
to  cover  the  provisions  in  the  amendment  of  1897;  second, 
that  the  legislature  has  no  power  to  prohibit  and  punish  acta 
in  themselves  harmless;  third,  that  the  act  is  unconstitutional. 

Even  in  criminal  cases  it  is  the  duty  of  counsel  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  court  to  the  points  on  which  an  instructiOR  is 
desired.     People  v.  Ezzo,  104  Mich.  311. 

We,  however,  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  information  charges 


168  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

the  coloration  to  make  an  inferior  article  appear  better  and 
more  valuable  than  it  really  was,  and  is  sufficient;  and  also 
that  there  was  evidence  to  sustain  the  allegation.  The  State 
Chemist  testified  that  the  effect  of  the  coal  tar  dye  was  to  make 
the  article  appear  of  greater  value  than  it  really  is,  and  that 
the  people  would  think  it  stronger  than  it  really  was.  It  is 
true,  his  testimony  was  weakened  by  cross-examination,  but  not 
sufficient  to  take  the  question  from  the  jury, — ^especially  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  no  other  purpose  than  to  make  the  article 
appear  better,  is  shown. 

II.  The  use  of  coal  tar  dye  being  harmless,  counsel  for  re- 
spondent insists  that  the  case  comes  within  the  rule  of  the 
recent  case  of  People  v.  Jennings,  94  N.  W.  R.  216;  10  D.  L.  N. 
39.  That  case  had  not  been  decided  when  this  case  was  tried. 
No  such  theory  was  advanced  upon  the  trial.  Even  if  it  were, 
we,  however,  think  the  case  is  clearly  distinguishable  from 
People  V.  Jennings.  The  color  given  to  lemon  extract,  which  of 
itself  is  almost  colorless,  is  no  indication  whatever  of  the 
strength  of  the  extract  or  its  value.  Its  color  is  a  mere  whim 
or  caprice  of  the  trade,  and  no  more  indicates  the  character 
and  value  of  the  extract  than  does  the  coloring  matter,  used  to 
color  butter,  indicate  its  character  and  value.  In  this  case 
Vanilla  resembles  the  color  of  the  bean  from  which  it  is  pro- 
duced. Its  strength  and  value  are  judged  to  some  extent  at 
least,  under  the  evidence  in  this  case,  from  its  color.  No  other 
object  is  apparent  from  the  use  of  the  coloring  than  to  make  it 
appear  of  a  quality   better  than  it  really  is. 

III.  It  is  urged  that  the  act  is  unconstitutional  on  account 
of  the  proviso  "that  nothing  in  this  act  shall  prevent  the  color- 
ing of  pure  butter."  This  act  is  similar  in  its  provisions  to 
that  involved  in  People  v.  Rotter,  91  N.  W.  R.  167;  and  People 
V.  Phillips,  Id.  616.  The  constitutionality  of  such  acts  was 
there  sustained,  and  a  discussion  is  unnecessary.  Capital  City 
Dairy  Co.  v.  Ohio,  183,  U.  S.  238,  246,  is  decisive  of  the  question. 

The  conviction  is  affirmed. 
The  other  justices  concurred. 


The   Pratt   Food    Company, 

V. 

Arthur  C.   Bird,   Dairy  and  Food 

Commissioner  of  the  State  of  Michigan. 

Montgomery,  J.:  The  bill  in  this  case  is  filed  to  restrain  the 
defendant,  his  clerks  and  employes,  from  writing,  printing, 
issuing,  publishing  or  sending  out  any  bulletin,  writing,  publi- 
cation   or   notice,   to   the   effect   that  complainant's   preparations 


DAIRY   AND    POOD    LAWS.  169 

sold  as  Pratt's  Food  for  Horses  and  Cattle,  Pratt's  Poultry 
Food,  and  Pratt's  Animal  Regulator,  or  either  of  them,  are  not 
licensed  under  Act  No.  12  of  the  Laws  of  1905,  and  warning 
the   public  against   buying  or   selling  these  preparations. 

The  bill  sets  out  that  the  defendant  asserts  and  claims  that 
fhese  preparations  come  within  the  terms  of  the  act,  and  that 
unless  restrained  by  injunction  he  will  so  assert  by  bulletins 
issued  to  the  trade,  and  by  this  method  intimidate  dealers  and 
prevent    their    purchasing   complainant's    products.  (We    are 

stating  simply  the  substance  of  the  averments  in  brief.)  It 
is  also  asserted  that  the  effect  of  such  bulletins  will  be  to  de- 
stroy and  ruin  the  complainant's  trade  and  work  irreparable 
injury. 

Upon  the  hearing  below  the  bill  was  dismissed,  and  the  com- 
plainant appeals.  Three  questions  are  presented  upon  the 
record,  first,  whether  in  view  of  the  case  complainant  is  en- 
titled to  the  remedy  here  invoked;  second,  whether  Act  No. 
12  of  the  Public  Acts  of  1905  is  constitutional;  third,  whether 
if  it  be  constitutional  the  complainant's  products  come  within 
the  terms  of  the  statute. 

1.  The  statute  in  question  is  an  amendment  of  Act  No,  211 
of  the  Public  Acts  of  1803,  entitled  "An  act  to  provide  for  the 
appointment  of  a  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  and  to  define 
his  powers  and  duties  and  fix  his  compensation,"  and  by  sec- 
tion 18  of  the  act  it  is  provided- that  "Any  manufacturer,  com- 
pany, person  or  persons  who  shall  sell,  offer  or  expose  for 
sale  or  for  distribution,  in  this  State,  any  concentrated  com- 
mercial feeding  stuff  used  for  feeding  live  stock,  shall  furnish 
with  each  car,  or  other  amounts  shipped  in  bulk,  and  shall 
affix  to  every  package  of  such  feeding  stuff,  in  a  conspicuous 
place,  on  the  outside  thereof,  a  plainly  printed  statement, 
clearly  and  truly  certifying  the  number  of  net  pounds  in  the 
car  or  package  sold  or  offered  for  sale,  the  name  or  trade- 
mark under  which  the  article  is  sold,  the  name  of  the  manu- 
facturer or  shipper,  the  place  of  manufacture,  the  place  of 
business,  and  a  chemical  analysis,  stating  the  percentages  it 
contains  of  crude  protein,  crude  fibre,  nitrogen — free  extract 
and  ether  extract,  all  constituents  to  be  determined  by  the 
methods  adopted  by  the  association  of  official  agricultural 
chemists.  Whenever  any  feeding  stuff  is  sold  at  retail  in 
bulk  or  in  packages  belonging  to  the  purchaser,  the  agent  or 
dealer  shall  furnish  to  him  a  certified  copy  of  the  chemical 
analysis  named  in  this  section.  The  term  concentrated  com- 
mercial feeding  stuffs  as  used  in  this  act  shall  include  linseed 
meal,  cotton  seed  meal,  pea  meals,  cocoanut  meals,  gluten 
meals,  oil  meals,  of  all  kinds,  gluten  feeds,  maize  feeds,  starch 
feeds,  mixed  sugar  feeds,  hominy  feeds,  rice  meals,  oat  feeds, 
corn  and  oat  feeds,  meat  meals,  dried  blood,  clover  meals,  mixed 


170  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

feeds  of  all  kinds,  slaughter  house  waste  products;  also  all 
condimental  stock  foods,  patented  and  proprietary  stock  foods, 
claimed  to  possess  nutritive  properties  and  all  other  materials 
intended  for  feeding  to  domestic  animals.  *  *  *"  a  penalty- 
is  provided  for  the  violation  of  this  provision. 

It  is  strenuously  insisted  by  the  Attorney  General  that  if  it 
be  conceded  that  the  complainant's  products  do  not  come  within 
the  inhibition  of  this  statute,  yet  no  remedy  by  injunction 
exists,  for  the  reason  that  the  effect  of  issuing  an  injunction 
is  to  restrain  the  prosecution  of  a  criminal  proceeding.  Numer- 
ous cases  are  cited,  among  them  Arbuckle  v.  Blackburn,  113 
Fed.  Rep.  625;  State  v.  Wood,  155  Mo^  425,  and  Predigested 
Food  Co.  V.  McNeal,  1  Oh.  N.  P.  266. 

In  so  far  as  these  cases  lay  down  the  rule  that  a  court  of 
^uity  will  not  interfere  to  restrain  a  public  officer  from  in- 
voking the  criminal  law  and  instituting  a  prosecution  for  a 
violation  of  a  statute  they  have  our  full  approval.  A  court  of 
equity  will  not  transfer  to  its  own  jurisdiction  the  trial  of  a 
criminal  case,  and  this  though  the  prosecution  may  fall  with 
some  hardship  upon  the  accused  party.  Nor,  as  a  general  propo- 
sition, will  a  court  interfere  to  restrain  the  publication  of  a 
libel. 

But  we  hold  in  Beck  v.  Railway  Teamsters'  Protective  Union, 
118  Mich.  497,  that  injunction  will  lie  to  restrain  a  combina- 
tion of  persons  from  acts  which  tend  to  ruin  complainant's 
business  by  bringing  to  bear  upon  his  customers  intimidating 
and  coercive  means.  The  principle  which  should  rule  the  pres- 
ent case  is  identical.  If  the  acts  which  are  threatened  are  un- 
lawful it  cannot  be  doubted  that  placing  in  the  hands  of  every 
dealer  in  the  State  a  bulletin  which  in  effect  threatens  them 
with  prosecution  in  case  they  make  use  of  these  products  in 
the  form  in  which  they  are  lawfully  sold  to  them  would  be  to 
absolutely  exclude  complainant's  business  from  the  State.  The 
case  presented  is  very  similar  in  this  aspect  to  that  of  Ameri- 
can School  of  Magnetic  Healing  v.  McAnnulty,  187,  U.  S.  94, 
which  case  involved  the  right  of  the  Postmaster  General  to  ex- 
clude the  complainants  from  the  use  of  the  United  States  mails. 
An  order  had  been  made  excluding  complainants  from  the  use 
of  the  mails.  The  court  interfered  and  held  that  such  order 
was  a  violation  of  the  property  rights  of  the  persons  affected 
and  granted  relief. 

2.     Is  the  law  constitutional? 

It  is  claimed  that  the  law  is  unconstitutional  in  that  it  vio- 
lates Section  20  of  Article  IV  of  the  constitution,  which  pro- 
vides that  no  law  shall  embrace  more  than  one  object,  which 
shall  be  expressed  in  its  title. 

It  is  established  by  our  decisions  that  if  what  is  introduced 
by  way  of  an  amendment  to  an  act  might  have  been   incorpo- 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD    LAWS.  171 

rated  in  the  act  under  the  original  title  there  is  no  violation 
of  this  section.  People  v.  Gadway,  61  Mich.  285;  Attorney  Gen- 
eral V.  Bolger,  128  Mich.  355. 

The  question  is  therefore  whether  under  the  original  title  a 
provision  fixing  a  standard  of  pure  food  and  providing  means 
to  prevent  deception  in  the  sale  of  such  food  is  within  the  title 
of  an  act  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a  Dairy  and  Food 
Commissioner  and  to  define  his  powers  and  duties  and  fix  his 
compensation.  We  think  the  title  is  within  our  previous  de- 
cisions sufficient.  It  is  obvious  to  one  reading  this  title  that 
there  must  have  been  imposed  upon  the  commissioner  certain 
powers  and  duties  to  make  his  Department  of  any  value  to  the 
State,  and  furthermore  that  these  powers  and  duties  must  have 
relation  to  something.  It  is  equally  obvious  that  the  relation 
of  these  powers  and  duties  must  be  to  the  subject  which  is 
brought  within  the  Department  that  is  created,  viz.,  the  Dairy 
and  Food  Department. 

The  title  is  very  similar  to  that  which  established  the  In- 
surance Bureau.  In  Connecticut  Mutual  Life  Ins.  Co.  v.  State 
Treasurer,  31  Mich.  6,  it  was  held  that  a  title  which  read  ''An 
act  to  establish  an  Insurance  Bureau"  was  sufficiently  broad  to 
cover  any  pertinent  regulations  respecting  the  bureau's  course 
of  action  towards  those  engaged  in  insurance,  and  any  appro- 
priate provisions  for  prescribing  the  duty  due  from  the  in- 
surance companies  to  the  State  in  the  matter  of  taxation,  with- 
out violating  the  constitutional  provisions. 

3.  The  question  of  more  difficulty  is  the  question  of  fact  as 
to  whether  the  preparations  of  complainant  are  concentrated 
commercial  feeding  stuffs  as  defined  by  the  act  cited  above. 

It  is  true  the  testimony  shows  that  upon  each  of  the  labels 
which  accompanied  Pratt's  Food  for  Horses  and  Cattle  was  the 
statement:  "Pratt's  Food  is  a  regulator,  to  be  used  according 
to  directions,  and  is  not  sold  as  a  feeding  stuff,  nor  is  it  to  be 
fed  in  place  of  grain  or  any  other  feed."  But  in  addition  to 
claiming  medicinal  properties  for  the  food  it  was  also  stated 
how  it  should  be  used  to  fatten  and  improve  stock.  It  was 
stated  that  'It  fattens  both  cattle  and  hogs  quickly,  makes  them 
grow  larger  and  healthier  and  make  their  meat  tender,  more 
juicy  and  better  eating."  It  also  stated  that  for  horses  it  "pro- 
duces bone,  muscle  and  better  staying  powers;  improves  the 
wind." 

When  this  statute  was  enacted  commercial  feeding  stuffs 
were  on  the  market  and  this  fact  must  have  been  known  to 
the  Legislature. 

In  employing  the  broad  language  "All  condimental  stock 
foods,  patented  and  proprietary  stock  foods,  claimed  to  possess 
nutritive  properties  and  all  other  materials  intended  to  cover 
all  preparations  for  which  the  claim  of  nutritive  qualities  was 


172  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

made."    Complainant's   preparations  come  within  this   language. 

Similar  representations  were  made  in  the  labels  of  other 
preparations. 

We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  Circuit  Judge  was  right  in 
holding  that  all  these  preparations  were  within  the  statute. 

The  decree  is  affirmed  with  costs. 


Pierre  Viaus  Maple  Company,  Complainant,  v.  Arthur  C.  Bird, 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  and  Joseph  Schnitzer,  In- 
spector of  the  Dairy  and  Food  Department,  Defendants. 
Before  Grant,  C.  J.,  Blair,  Montgomery,  Ostrander  and 
Hooker,  JJ. 

Complainant  is  the  manufacturer  of  a  brand  of  syrup  known 
as  the  "Pierre  Viaus  Pure  Canadian  Maple  Syrup  and  Cane 
Syrup."  The  trade-mark  being  the  letters  P.  V.  The  bill  al- 
leges that  the  Canadian  Pure  Maple  Syrup  exceeds  the  amount 
of  Cane  Syrup.  It  sets  forth  efforts  made  with  the  Pure  Food 
Commission  to  agree  upon  a  label  which  shall  comply  with  the 
law,  the  failure  of  these  negotiations,  the  representations  made 
to  the  trade  by  the  defendants  that  the  sale  of  this  syrup  is 
illegal,  and  the  injurious  effect  upon  the  complainant's  busi- 
ness, and  prays  that  the  defendants  be  restrained  from  in  any 
manner  interfering  with  its  business.  To  this  bill  of  complaint 
the  defendants  demurred  upon  the  ground  that  the  syrups  men- 
tioned in  said  bill  of  complaint  are  not  labeled  as  required  by 
the  laws  of  this  State.  The  demurrer  was  overruled  and  the 
defendants  have  appealed. 
Grant,  C.  J. 

It  is  urged  by  the  Attorney  General  that  the  sale  of  this 
mixture  is  in  violation  of  section  5007  of  the  Compiled  Laws, 
reading  as  follows: 

"That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  dealer,  firm,  manu- 
facturer or  corporation  to  manufacture  and  sell,  or  offer  for 
sale,  any  maple  sugar,  maple  molasses  or  maple  syrup  that  is 
in  anywise  adulterated  with  common  sugar,  beet  sugar,  glucose 
or  any  other  foreign  substance  without  distinctly  marking, 
stamping  or  labeling  the  articles  or  the  package  containing  the 
same  with  the  true  and  appropriate  name  of  such  article  and 
the  percentage  in  which  common  sugar,  beet  sugar,  glucose  or 
any  other  foreign  substance  enters  into  the  composition  of  the 
same." 

It  is  urged  by  the  complainant  that  the  case  falls  within  Act 
193,  Public  Acts  of  1895,  known  as  the  Pure  Food  Law,  and 
entitled  "An  act  to  prohibit  and  prevent  adulteration,  fraud 
and  deception  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  articles  of  food 
and  drink." 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  173 

Sec.  1  (C.  L.  5010)  of  fhe  act  prohibits  the  sale  or  having  in 
possession  with  intent  to  sell  any  article  of  food  which  is 
adulterated  within  the  meaning  of  the  act. 

Sec.  2  (C.  L.  5011)  defines  the  term  -'food"  to  include  all 
articles  used  for  food  or  drink. 

Sec.  3  (C.  L.  5012)  states  what  articles  shall  be  deemed  to  be 
adulterated.     The  section  closes  with  the  following  proviso: 

"Provided  further,  That  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not 
appl.v  to  mixtures  or  compounds  recognized  as  ordinary  articles 
or  ingredients  of  articles  of  food,  if  each  and  every  package 
sold  or  offered  for  sale  bear  the  name  and  address  of  the  manu- 
facturer and  be  distinctly  labeled  under  its  own  distinctive 
name,  and  in  a  manner  so  as  to  plainly  and  correctly  show  that 
it  is  a  mixture  or  compound,  and  is  not  in  violation  with  defini- 
tions  fourth   and   seventh    of   this   section." 

The  court  held  that  this  syrup  came  within  the  Pure  Food 
Law  (Act  103),  and  not  under  the  act  prohibiting  the  adul- 
teration of  maple  sugar,  etc.,  and  that  it  came  within  the 
proviso  above  quoted. 

We  think  the  court  was  in  error.  The  act  in  regard  to  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  maple  sugar  is  complete  in  itself,  and 
covers  the  entire  subject.  It  was  intended  to  prohibit  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  maple  sugar  under  any  name  without 
labeling  the  product  with  the  true  and  appropriate  name,  stat- 
ing thereon  the  percentage  of  any  other  ingredient  used  in  its 
manufacture.  The  title  of  the  act  is  "An  act  to  prohibit  the 
adulteration  of  maple  sugar,  maple  molasses  and  maple  syrup." 
The  word  "adulteration"  in  this  statute  means  the  mixture  of 
any  foreign  substance,  wholesome  or  unwholesome,  with  maple 
sugar.  The  evident  purpose  of  the  statute  is  to  compel  all  per- 
sons manufacturing  or  selling  maple  sugar  to  inform  the  public 
net  only  of  what  the  product  is  composed,  but  the  proportions 
of  each  article  used  in  the  manufacture. 

Decree  reversed,  and  bill  dismissed  with  costs  of  both  courts. 


Armour  &  Co.,  Complainants, 

V. 

Arthur  C.  Bird,  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner, 
et  al.,  Defendants. 

Before:  Blair,  C.  J.,  Grant,  Montgomery,  Ostrander,  Hooker, 
J.  J.: 

Complainant  is  a  corporation  organized  under  the  laws  of  the 
State  of  New  Jersey,  with  headquarters  in  Chicago,  Illinois.  It 
is  and  has  been,  for  many  years,  engaged  in  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  fresh  and  cured  meats  and  sausage  and  other  meat 


174  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


products.      Its    sale    of   these    products,    including    sausage,    ex- 
tended over  the  entire  State  of  Michigan. 

In  the  year  of  1906,  the  defendant,  the  Dairy  and  Food  Com- 
missioner, caused  chemical  examination  to  be  made  of  the 
various  brands  of  sausage  sold  within  the  State,  including  that 
of  the  complainant,  and  found  that  many  of  them  contained 
cereals  and  a  percentage  of  water  greater  than  that  found  in 
meat  alone.  On  January  16,  1907,  he  issued  the  following  cir- 
cular: 

"Gentlemen: — A  growing  tendency  on  the  part  of  manufactur- 
ers of  sausage,  bolognas  and  similar  meat  products,  to  use 
various  preparations  and  substances  foreign  to  the  legitimate 
ingredients  necessary  to  the  manufacture  of  these  articles  of 
food,  the  said  preparations  being  commonly  known  and  desig- 
nated as  fillers,  binder,  etc.,  has  prompted  this  Department  to 
make  a  thorough  investigation  into  such  sausages.  This  has 
been  done  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  true  reasons 
for  the  widespread  practice  of  using  the  preparations  men- 
tioned. 

The  results  obtained  from  the  investigation  as  carried  on  in 
the  Department  laboratory  lead  to  but  one  conclusion,  viz., 
that  the  addition  of  so-called  binders  and  fillers  to  meat  prod- 
ucts is  primarily  for  the  purpose  of  substituting  in  part  an 
inferior  or  cheaper  substance  for  legitimate  ingredient,  there- 
by lessening  the  cost  of  manufacture. 

The  first  and  second  subdivisions  of  section  5012  of  the  Com- 
piled Laws  provide  that  an  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adul- 
terated within  the  meaning  of  the  act, — first,  if  any  substance 
or  substances  have  been  mixed  with  it  so  as  to  lower  or  de- 
preciate or  injuriously  affect  its  quality,  strength  or  purity; 
second,  if  any  inferior  or  cheaper  substance  or  substances  have 
been  substituted  wholly  or  in  part  for  it.  Basing  its  ruling  on 
the  subdivisions  of  section  5012  above  cited,  this  Department 
holds  that  the  addition  of  the  so-called  binders  and  fillers  men- 
tioned to  meat  products  is  contrary  to  law.  From  and  after 
this  day,  manufacturers  and  dealers  will  be  held  to  a  strict 
account  for  each  and  every  violation.  Provided,  however,  that 
dealers  within  the  State  are  given  until  January  25,  1907,  to  dis- 
pose of  stocks  on  hand. 

"Yours  very  truly, 

"A.  C.  BIRD, 
*'State  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner." 

This  circular  was  sent  to  all  the  meat  dealers  of  the  State, 
and  a  copy  sent  to  the  complainant  at  Chicago.  Those  employed 
under  the  direction  of  the  defendant  Food  Commissioner  also 
verbally  informed  the  retail  dealers  of  the  State  that  they 
would  be  prosecuted  if  they  did  not  comply  with  the  above  order. 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  175 

The   trade   of   the   complainant   in    Michigan    was    very   large, 

and  the  effect  of  this  circular,  and  the  threats  of  prosecution 
verbally  made,  naturally  tended  to  decrease  very  largely  the 
complainant's  sales  in  this  State,  and  to  cause  it  considerable 
loss.  Therefore,  on  November  18,  1907,  complainant  filed  its 
bill  of  complaint  in  this  cause,  setting  forth  the  above  circular 
and  threats  on  the  part  of  the  defendants,  the  injury  to  its  busi- 
ness, that  defendants  were  acting  illegally  in  their  conduct, 
and  praying  that  they  be  restrained  from  "declaring  in  any  man- 
ner, orally  or  in  writing,  to  the  customers  and  patrons  of  your 
orator,  or  to  the  people  of  the  State  of  Michigan,  that  the 
sausages  and  other  meat  products  of  your  orator  containing 
cereal,  manufactured  and  sold,  and  offered  for  sale  in  the  State 
of  Michigan,  are  sold  and  offered  for  sale  in  violation  of  any 
statute  of  the  State  of  Michigan."  The  bill  alleges  that  the 
sausage  manufactured  and  sold  by  the  complainant  bear  labels 
showing  their  respective  ingredients,  in  accordance  with  the 
standard  fixed  by  the  laws  of  the  United  States  and  the  regula- 
tions of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  thereunder,  a  sample  of 
said  labels  being  set  forth  in  the  bill  and  reading  as  follows: 

ARMOUR'S  "DEVONSHIRE"  Farm  Style  SAUSAGE 
MEAT.  Made  from  the  Meat  of  Hams  and  Selected 
Young  Pork.  Prepared  with  choicest  spices  and  cere- 
als.    Armour  &  Company. 

U.  S.  Inspected  and  passed  under  the  Act  of  Congress 
of  June  30,  1906.     Establishment  2  A. 

An  answer  was  duly  filed  denying  that  the  sausage  manu- 
factured and  sold  by  the  complainant  in  this  State  containing 
cereals  and  water  is  a  wholesome  product,  or  that  it  is  manu- 
factured in  accordance  with  the  Act  of  Congress  of  June  30, 
1906,  and  the  regulations  of  the  United  States  Department  of 
Agriculture;  or  that  it  is  a  compound  or  mixture  within  the 
meaning  of  the  proviso  of  Sec.  3,  Act  193,  Pub.  Acts  of  1895. 
as  amended.  The  answer  admits  that  the  sausage  of  the 
complainant  is  shipped  into  this  State  in  packages,  or  boxes, 
labeled  with  the  trade  name  of  the  sausage,  and  the  words 
''with  cereal,"  but  alleges  that  the  consumer,  or  purchaser  of 
the  retail  dealer,  is  in  no  way  advised,  when  he  purchases,  that 
the  sausage  contains  cereal,  or  cereal  and  added  water,  un- 
less such  purchaser  purchased  the  entire  package  shipped  to 
the  dealer,  and  that  even  then  he  was  not  informed  that  the 
product  contains  added  water. 

Both  the  bill  and  answer  contain  other  allegations  which  we 
deem  it  unnecessary  to  state.  Issue  was  joined,  proofs  taken 
in  open  court  and  by  deposition,  and  after  a  full  hearing  decree 
was  entered  dismissing  the  bill.     The  statute,  C.   L.   Sec.   5012, 


176  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 


under  which  defendants  claim  to  justify  their  action,  is  as  fol- 
lows: 

"An  article  shall  be  deemed  to  be  adulterated  within  the 
meaning  of  this  act:  First,  if  any  substance  or  substailces  have 
been  mixed  with  it,  so  as  to  lower  or  depreciate  or  injuriously 
affect  its  quality,  strength  or  purity;  second,  if  any  inferior  or 
cheaper  substance  or  substances  have  been  substituted  wholly 
or  in  part  for  it;  third,  if  any  valuable  or  necessary  constituent 
or  ingredient  has  been  wholly  or  in  part  abstracted  from  it; 
fourth,  if  it  is  an  imitation  of,  or  is  sold  under  the  name  of  an- 
other article;  fifth,  if  it  consists  wholly  or  in  part  of  a  dis- 
ceased,  decomposed,  putrid,  infected,  tainted  or  rotten  animal 
or  vegetable  substance  or  article,  whether  manufactured  or  not, 
or  in  the  case  of  milk,  if  it  is  the  product  of  a  diseased  animal; 
sixth,  if  it  is  colored,  coated,  polished,  or  powdered  whereby 
damage  or  inferiority  is  concealed  or  if  by  any  means  it  is 
made  to  appear  better  or  of  greater  value  than  it  really  is; 
seventh,  if  it  contains  any  added  substance  or  ingredient  which 
is  poisonous  or  injurious  to  the  health:  Provided,  that  noth- 
ing in  this  act  shall  prevent  the  coloring  of  pure  butter:  And 
provided  further,  that  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  apply 
to  mixtures  or  compounds  recognized  as  ordinary  articles  or 
ingredients  of  articles  of  food,  if  each  and  every  package  sold 
or  offered  for  sale  bear  the  name  and  address  of  the  manu- 
facturer and  be  distinctly  labeled  under  its  own  distinctive 
name,  and  in  a  manner  so  as  to  plainly  and  correctly  show  that 
it  is  a  mixture  or  compound,  and  is  not  in  violation  with  de- 
finitions  fourth  and  seventh   of  this  section." 

Grant,  J.:  The  following  facts  are  admitted  or  established 
beyond  controversy: 

(a)  The  sausage  manufactured  by  the  complainant  is  a 
wholesome  article  of  food.  It  contains  nothing  deleterious  to 
health. 

(b)  It  is  a  mixture  or  compound  within  the  meaning  of  the 
proviso  in  the  statute  above  quoted,  being  composed  of  meat, 
cereal,  salt  and  spices. 

(c)  It  is  made  in  accordance  with  the  Act  of  Congress  and 
directions  prescribed  thereunder  by  the  Commissioner  of  Agri- 
culture, and  under  the  inspection  of  the  United  States  inspec- 
tors. 

(d)  Sausage  is  made  of  different  kinds  of  meat,  viz.,  pork, 
beef  and  veal.  Whether  manufactured  for  interstate  commerce 
or  domestic  use  within  the  State,  it  is  sometimes  made  with 
cereal,  and  sometimes  without  it.  Cereal  is  not  a  necessary 
ingredient  to  its  manufacture,  although  it  has  been  used  by 
most  manufacturers  for  many  years. 

(e)  Water   is  an  essential   ingredient  in  the  manufacture  of 


DAIRY   AND    POOD    LAWS.  177 

sausage,  wheth€r  made  with  or  without  cereal.  This  is  shown 
by  the  evidence  of  the  defendants.  One  of  their  witnesses,  with 
an  experience  of  thirty-five  years,  testified: 

"In  the  manufacture  of  pork  sausage  we  use  pork,  and  if  the 
pork  is  a  little  too  fat  we  put  in  some  veal  or  beef.  It  is  neces- 
sary to  have  a  little  water  added,  a  quart  and  a  half  to  100 
pounds.  It  is  pretty  hard  to  make  them  without.  We  use  a 
little  more  water  than  would  be  found  in  the  meat  when  freshly 
killed." 

Another,  who  had  been  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  sau- 
sage since  1864,  testified: 

"I  put  a  little  water  in  pork  sausage.  I  use  from  five  to  ten 
pounds  of  water  to  100  pounds  of  meat.  Enough  to  make  it 
pliable  that  is  all,  I  use  from  eight  to  ten  pounds  of  water  in 
making  beef  sausage.  I  presume  you  could  make  sausage  with- 
out water,  but  you  could  not  stuff  it  very  well." 

Another  who  learned  to  make  sausage  in  Germany,  testified: 

"I  have  always  used  water  and  still  use  water  in  the  manu- 
facture of  sausage.  Water  is  necessary.  They  use  water  in 
making  sausage  in  Germany.  So  far  as  J  know  everyone  used 
it." 

The  United  States  regulations  require  that  the  water  used 
shall  be  pure. 

(f)  It  is  not  in  violation  of  definitions  four  and  seven  of  the 
act.  It  does  not  violate  definition  seven  because  it  contains  no 
substance  or  ingredient  poisonous  or  injurious  to  health.  It 
does  not  violate  definition  four  because  meat  is  the  basis  and 
principal  ingredient  of  the  article.  As  manufactured  by  com- 
plainant, it  contains  from  two  to  ten  per  cent  of  cereal.  It  is 
and  has  been,  for  more  than  forty  years,  recognized  in  the 
trade  as  sausage.  When  sold  as  sausage  with  cereal  added  it 
deceives  no  one,  is  not  an  imitation  and  manufacturers  are  en- 
titled to  manufacture  and  label  it  as  sausage  with  cereal.  It 
is  not  contended  that  manufacturers  have  not  the  right  to  use 
the  name  "sausage"  when  sold  with  a  proper  label. 
U.    I  .        .<  •  •  f  '    ■     .    ' 

The  Federal  statute  is  practically  identical  with  that  of  Michi- 
gan, and  contains  a  proviso  reading: 

"That  an  article  of  food  which  does  not  contain  any  added 
poisonous  or  deleterious  ingredients  shall  not  be  deemed  to  be 
adulterated  or  misbranded  in  the  following  cases: 

First.  In  the  case  of  mixtures  or  compounds  which  may  be 
now  or  from  time  to  time  hereafter  known  as  articles  of  food 
under  their  own  distinctive  names,  and  not  an  imitation  of  or 
offered  for  sale  under  the  distinctive  name  of  another  article, 
if  the  name  be  accompanied  on  the  same  label  or  brand   with 

23 


178  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

a  statement  of  the  place  where  said  article  has  been  manufac- 
tured or  produced. 

Acting  under  this  law,  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  on  Sep- 
tember 12,  1906,  adopted  the  following  regulation: 

"Sausages  and  Chopped  Meats.  The  word  sausage  without 
a  prefix  indicating  the  species  of  animal  is  considered  to  be  a 
mixture  of  minced  or  chopped  meats  with  or  without  spices. 
If  any  species  of  animal  is  indicated  as  pork  sausage,  the  sau- 
sage must  be  wholly  made  from  the  meat  of  that  species.  If 
any  flour  or  other  cereal  is  used  the  label  must  so  state.  If 
any  other  meat  product  is  added,  the  label  must  so  state." 

To  this  regulation  the  department  added  "manufacturers  are 
warned  that  the  above  rulings  do  not  exempt  them  from  the 
enforcement  of  state  laws." 

The  learned  circuit  judge,  in  his  opinion,  found  that  sausage 
manufactured  as  is  that  of  the  complainant,  "is  probably  as 
healthy  as  pure  sausage  such  as  was  known  to  the  fathers." 

Briefly  stated  then,  the  case  is  this:  complainant,  a  resident 
of  another  state,  is  manufacturing  and  shipping  into  this  State - 
a  wholesome  article  of  interstate  commerce  in  strict  accord  with 
the  law  and  regulations  of  the  federal  government.  State  law 
cannot  interfere  with  this  interstate  traffic.  The  law  here  in- 
volved does  not  attempt  to  interfere  with  it,  or  to  deny  to  the 
complainant  the  right  to  sell  and  ship  its  goods  to  retail  deal- 
ers in  this  State.  There  are,  therefore,  but  two  questions  ma- 
terial to  the  determination  of  this  controversy,  viz. : 

(1)  May  the  state  through  its  legislature  enact  laws  regu- 
lating the  domestic  sales  of  this  product  to  consumers  within 
the  state? 

(2)  Does  the  statute  above  cited  include  the  product  made 
by  the  complainant? 

It  is  not  contended  that  the  state  is  not  clothed  with  the 
power  to  regulate  the  domestic  sale  of  such  products  after  their 
shipment  into  the  state.  Intoxicating  liquor,  which  is  a  subject 
of  interstate  commerce,  may  be  shipped  into  this  state  in  orig- 
inal packages,  but  it  cannot  be  sold  within  the  state  in  viola- 
tion of  the  state  laws  regulating  or  prohibiting  its  sale.  No 
contention  is  made  that  the  state  statute  in  question  is  not 
constitutional  and  reasonable.  Pure  food  laws  have  been  en- 
acted probably  in  all  the  states  and  have  been  universally  held 
valid  when  reasonable.  The  sole  question  therefore  left  to  de- 
termine is  whether  the  statute  includes  sales  to  consumers  in 
small  quantities  taken  from  the  original  packages.  If  the  do- 
mestic dealer  were  to  sell  an  original  package  labeled  as  above 
to  the  consumer,  such  sale,  would  be  valid,  because  the  label 
complies  with  the  law  and  notifies  the  purchaser  that  the  article 
is   not   a   sausage   of   meat   alone,   but   a   sausage   composed   of 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  179 

meat  and  cereal.  It  is  not  contended  that  manufacturers  of 
sausage  have  not  the  right  to  label  their  product  "sausage"  with 
the  statement  added  that  it  is  mixed  with  other  producta,  speci- 
fying them. 

If  we  understand  the  position  of  counsel  for  complainant  cor- 
rectly, it  is  that  in  construing  this  statute  courts  should  be 
governed,  not  by  the  popular  and  common  understanding  of  the 
meaning  of  the  word  "sausage,"  but  by  its  trade  and  commercial 
meaning;  that  is,  its  meaning  as  understood  between  the  manu- 
facturers and  their  customers  to  whom  they  sell  for  retail  to 
consumers.    They  say: 

"It  is  unmistakable  that  the  legislature  understood  it  was 
enacting  a  law  with  reference  to  an  article  of  food  which  was 
then  a  subject  of  trade  and  commerce  among  the  people.  There 
were  at  times  scores  of  different  kinds  of  "sausage"  upon  the 
market,  that  is,  sausage  made  in  different  ways,  a  difference  in 
the  ingredients  used  in  the  various  kinds,  and  a  variance  in  the 
proportions  used;  and  different  manufacturers  and  dealers  made 
and  dealt  in  different  kinds,  and  each  knew  that  all  this  variety 
of  meat  food  products  were  included  in  the  term  "sausage," 
and  the  legislature  is  charged  with  knowledge  of  that  fact,  and 
must  be  presumed  to  have  used  the  term  "food"  accordingly." 

In  support  of  this  they  cite  several  cases  from  the  federal 
courts  construing  the  tariff  or  duty  acts,  in  which  it  has  been 
held  that  the  laws  of  Congress  imposing  duties  upon  imported 
goods  must  be  construed  with  reference  to  the  trade  or  com- 
mercial meaning  of  the  articles  mentioned  in  the  law.  Among 
the  cases  cited  are  the 

Two  Hundred  Chests  of  Tea,  9  Wheaton  430; 
Cadwalader  v.  Zeh,  151  U.  S.  171; 
McCoy  V.  Hedden,  38  Fed.  Rep.  89. 

In  the  Two  Hundred  Chests  of  Teas  it  was  held  that  "bohea 
tea"  was  used  in  the  duty  act  in  its  known  commercial  sense, 
viz.,  "that  article  which  in  the  known  usage  of  the  trade  ac- 
quired that  distinctive  appellation." 

In  Cadwalader  v.  Zeh,  the  question  was  whether,  under  the 
duty  act,  earthenware  consisting  of  small  cups,  saucers,  mugs, 
etc.,  having  on  them  pictures  of  animals  and  other  objects, 
and  letters  of  the  alphabet,  should  have  been  assessed  as  toys 
with  35  per  cent  advalorem,  or  as  china,  etc.,  with  60  per  cent 
ad  valorem.  The  case  was  held  to  depend  upon  the  commercial 
meaning  of  the  word  "toys." 

In  McCoy  v.  Hedden,  the  question  was  whether  currycombs 
were  dutiable  under  a  provision  imposing  a  duty  upon  combs 
of  all  kinds.     If  they  were  not  known  to  the  trade  among  mer- 


180  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

chants  as  combs  they  were  held  not  dutiable  as  such.  These 
and  other  similar  cases  arose  between  the  United  States  and 
importers  of  foreign  goods,  and  do  not  apply  to  cases  arising 
under  the  pure  food  laws  of  state  governments.  Courts  will 
take  cognizance  of  the  well-known  fact  that  farmers,  laboring 
men  and  consumers  are  not  generally  familiar  with  the  customs 
of  trade  and  commerce  in  importing  goods,  or  of  understandings 
of  the  trade  between  manufacturers  and  merchants  who  buy 
those  products  for  retail  trade.  Such  construction  would 
emasculate  the  pure  food  laws  and  deprive  the  people  of  the 
protection  which  the  legislature  wisely  intended  to  give  them. 

Sausage  is  defined  by  all  the  lexicographers  as  an  article  of 
food  composed  of  meat,  salt  and  spices.  (See  Worcester's  and 
Century  dictionaries).  The  people  generally  so  understand  it. 
The  writer  of  this  opinion  would  be  compelled  to  admit  that 
until  very  recently  he  had  no  knowledge  that  cereal  was  used 
in  the  manufacture  of  sauage.  It  is  too  manifest  for  further 
argument  that  the  legislature  in  enacting  the  law  was  not  pro- 
viding for  the  regulation  of  sales  between  manufacturers  and 
merchants,  but  between  retail  dealers  and  consumers.  They 
enacted  the  law  solely  for  the  protection  of  consumers,  the  peo- 
ple who  buy  and  eat  the  products.  The  consumer  who  prefers 
sausage  made  of  meat  alone  is  entitled  to  be  Informed  that 
he  is  buying  such  an  article.  The  consumer  who  prefers  sau- 
sage mixed  with  cereal  is  entitled  to  know  that  he  is  purchas- 
ing that  article.  The  contention  of  the  complainant,  if  sus- 
tained, would  deprive  the  consumer  of  this  right  which  the 
statute  plainly  gives  him.  We  cannot  follow  State  v.  Nesland, 
120  N.  W.  Rep.  107,  (Iowa),  wherein  it  is  held  that  sales  in 
small  quantities  from  original  packages  are  not  within  the 
statute.  In  that  case  a  pound  of  lard  was  sold  from  a  fifty 
pound  package  properly  labeled  with  its  constituent  parts,  but 
it  was  held  that  the  retail  dealer  was  not  required  to  label  the 
small  packages  sold.  That  opinion  is  based  upon  the  well- 
known  rule  that  penal  statutes  must  be  strictly  construed.  The 
statute  of  Michigan  expressly  provides  that  these  mixtures  must 
be  labeled  showing  the  different  kinds  of  ingredients  contained 
in  them.     Sec.  2  is  as  follows: 

"The  term  food,  as  used  herein,  shall  include  all  articles  used 
for  food  or  drink,  or  intended  to  be  eaten  or  drank  by  man, 
whether  simple,  mixed  or  compound." 

This  is  a  general  statute  covering  all  food  products  not  other- 
wise specifically  provided  for.  We  consider  its  provisions  per- 
fectly plain,  and  not  subject  to  any  misunderstanding  or  un- 
certainty. To  hold  otherwise  would  substantially  exclude  all 
the   benefits   and   protection   to  the   people   of   the    state   which 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  181 

the  statute  was  clearly  designed  to  grant.  We,  therefore,  hold 
that  retail  packages  of  small  amounts  taken  from  the  original 
package  of  the  manufacturer,  and  sold  to  the  consumer,  must 
be  properly  labeled  as  the  law  directs. 

The  court  below  dismissed  the  complainant's  bill,  thereby 
granting  it  no  relief  whatever.  In  view  of  the  position  taken 
by  the  Food  Commissioner  in  his  circulars  and  answer  herein 
filed;  and  in  view  of  the  importance  to  the  complainant,  and 
to  the  people  of  the  state  to  know  under  what  conditions  a 
wholesome  article  of  interstate  commerce  may  be  sold  in  this 
state,  we  think  the  learned  circuit  judge  should  have  entered 
a  decree  defining  the  rights  and  determining  under  what  con- 
ditions complainant,  as  well  as  other  manufacturers,  may  have 
their  valuable  and  wholesome  products  sold  by  the  retail  deal- 
ers, and  to  restrain  the  defendants  from  interfering  with  such 
legitimate  sales. 

The  Food  Commissioner,  as  above  stated,  denied  in  his  answer 
that  the  sausage  made  by  the  complainant  was  a  wholesome 
product,  or  that  it  was  a  mixture  or  compound  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  act,  and  insisted  that  it  was  an  adulteration.  His 
attitude  is  further  shown  by  his  reply  to  complainant's  letter 
of  January  17,  1907,  asking  "if  there  would  be  any  objection  to 
using  cereal  if  such  fact  is  stated  on  label  same  as  provided 
by  national  law."  He  denied  this  permission,  which  was,  not 
only  a  compliance  with  the  federal  law,  but  a  compliance  with 
the  state  law. 

The  use  of  cereal  in  the  manufacture  of  sausage  has  been 
very  general.  The  State  Food  and  Dairy  Commissioner  of  Iowa, 
who  at  the  time  of  the  hearing  below  had  held  office  for  five 
years,  testified  to  its  general  use  in  that  state,  stating  that 
"the  ingredients  used  by  the  Iowa  manufacturers  in  making 
sausage  are  chopped  meats,  salt,  spices,  flour  and  sufficient 
water."    In  July,  1907,  he  issued  a  bulletin  stating: 

"The  Commissioner  has  no  authority  to  establish  standards 
for  the  information  of  the  public,  it  is  here  stated  that  this 
Department  will  not  interfere  with  the  sale  of  sausage  because 
of  the  presence  of  wholesome  flour,  provided  that  an  analysis 
does  not  show  more  than  five  per  cent  of  such  flour." 

It  appears  to  be  established  by  the  evidence  that  sausage 
made  with  cereal  is  sold  cheaper  than  that  made  of  meats 
alone.  If  so,  the  people  desiring  to  buy  and  eat  th-e  cheaper 
products  should  have  the  privilege  of  doing  so,  and  such  product 
should  not  by  any  decision  of  the  court  be  prohibited  from  sale. 

The  opinion  of  the  circuit  judge  does  not  prohibit  its  sal« 
when  properly  labeled.  He  held  that  the  trouble  was  not  with 
the  use  of  cereal,  but  in  permitting  the  product  to  be  sold  at 
the  retail  counter  without  informing  the  customer  that  cereal 
is  a  part  of  it.     Counsel  for  respondents  conceded  in  the  oral 


182  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

argument  in  this  court  that  it  was  a  wholesome  food  and  was 
entitled  to  sale  in  this  state,  when  sold  under  a  proper  label 
informing  customers  of  what  it  is  composed. 

It  is  conceded  that  the  use  of  cereal  requires  more  water  than 
does  sausage  made  with  meat  alone.  Anyone  of  intelligence 
would,  upon  reflection,  know  this  to  be  the  fact.  The  only 
doubt  I  entertain  in  the  case  is  whether  the  label  should,  in 
addition  to  the  words  "with  cereal,"  contain  also  "and  water." 
In  view  of  the  fact  that  water  is  generally  used  in  the  manu- 
facture of  all  sausage,  and  that  no  law  or  regulation  of  the  food 
department  has  fixed  the  amount  of  water  that  may  be  used, 
it  would  seem  like  judicial  legislation  for  the  court  to  require 
the  label  to  show  that  water  is  used  in  the  manufacture. 

The  statute  does  not  require  the  label  to  state  the  proportion 
of  the  ingredients  composing  the  mixture,  but  only  the  names  of 
the  ingredients.  The  statute  makes  special  provision  for  butter, 
cheese,  lard,  canned  fruits  and  vegetables,  coffee  and  molasses. 
There  are  other  statutes  governing  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
specific  products  requiring  the  proportions  of  the  ingredients 
to  be  placed  upon  the  labels,  such  as  Act  123,  Public  Acts  1903; 
People  v.  Harris,  135  Mich.  136. 

It  is  within  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  pass  an  act  specifi- 
cally provided  for  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  sausage,  and  that 
the  labels  should  state  the  proportions  of  the  ingredients  used.. 
We  hold  a  label  "sausage  with  cereal"  upon  packages  sold  to 
consumers  is  a  compliance  with  the  statute  in  labeling  the  mix- 
ture, and  a  decree  should  be  entered  so  stating.  A  decree  will 
be  entered  in  this  court  in  accordance  with  the  above  opinion. 
No  costs  will  be  allowed. 


PEOPLE  V.  JACOB. 

(Opinion  filed  January  4,  1915.) 

State   Officers — Dairy    and    Food    Commissioner — Inspection    of 
Prisons  by  Statutes — Act  12,  P.  A.  1905. 

In  the  prosecution  of  the  Superintendent  of  the  Detroit  House 
of  Correction  for  his  refusal  to  permit  inspectors  of  the  State 
Dairy  and   Food  Department  to  inspect  the  prison; 

HELD,  (by  an  equally  divided  Court) :  Though  the  State  Dairy 
and  Food  Commissioner  is  limited  in  his  investigations  to  in- 
spections of  the  store,  etc.,  of  the  manufacturer  or  vendor  of 
food  or  drink  products  which  are  made,  stored,  sold  or  offered 
for  sale,  as  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction  is  paid  by  the  dif- 
ferent counties  of  the  state  for  the  board  of  prisoners  sent  to 


DAIRY   AND   FOOD   LAWS.  183 


that  institution  under  contract,  it  comes  within  the  class  that 
sells  food,  etc.,  and  is  amendable  to  the  provisions  of  Act  No. 
12,  P.   A.  1905. 

The  inspection  of  state  penal  institutions  is  within  the  pur- 
view of  the  statute  relating  to  the  general  Pure  Food  Law. 

While  the  law  provided  for  the  inspection  of  penal  institutions 
by  the  Board  of  Corrections  and  Charities  (Sec.  2252,  C.  L.  1897) 
and  in  the  case  of  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction,  by  the 
Board  of  Inspectors  appointed  by  the  Common  Council  of  the 
City,  the  act  creating  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction  (Sec. 
2156,  C  L.  1897)  permits  inspections  by  any  state  authority,  of 
which  the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Department  is  one. 

In  an  opinion  by  Justice  Stone  (Ostrander,  Kuhn,  Moore,  J  J., 
concurring)    the  opposite  view  is  taken. 

Exceptions  to  r€corder's  court  of  Detroit.  William  F.  Con- 
nolly, Judge. 

Appeal  of  Bernhardt  Jacob  from  a  conviction  for  refusing  to 
permit  inspectors  from  the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Department 
to  inspect  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction.     Affirmed. 

Grant  Fellows,  Attorney  General;  James  W.  Helme,  Dairy 
and  Food   Commissioner,  both  of  Lansing,  for  the  People. 

William  E.  Tarsney,  assistant  corporation  counsel,  (Richard 
I.  Lawson,  corporation  counsel,  of  counsel),  both  of  Detroit,  for 
defendant. 

Before  the  Full  Bench. 

Stone,  J.:  This  case  is  before  us  upon  exceptions  before  sen- 
tence. The  appellant  is  the  superintendent  of  the  Detroit  House 
of  Correction,  a  state  penal  institution,  located  in  the  city  of 
Detroit.  On  October  21,  1913,  Burr  B.  Lincoln,  a  state  dairy 
and  food  inspector,  sought  to  make  an  investigation  of  the 
food  conditions  in  the  said  institution,  and  for  that  purpose 
he  called  upon  the  appellant  and  requested  that  he  be  permitted 
to  go  through  the  building  and  see  the  foods  that  were  there 
served.  This  request  was  refused  by  the  appellant,  who  in- 
formed the  inspector  that  he  had  no  right  there;  that  it  was 
an  institution  over  which  the  dairy  and  food  inspectors  had  no 
jurisdiction,  and  that  he  could  not  go  through  the  Institution. 
Because  of  this  refusal  complaint  was  made  charging  appel- 
lant   with    a   violation    of   Act   No.    167   of  the   Public   Acts   of 


184  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

1899,  being  "An  act  in  relation  to  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  of  the  state  of  Michigan." 
This  act  provides  that  any  person  who  shall  obstruct  the  said 
commissioner,  or  his  deputy,  or  any  of  his  duly  appointed  in- 
spectors, by  refusing  to  allow  him  entrance  to  any  place  where 
he  is  authorized  to  enter  in  the  discharge  of  his  official  duty, 
shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  prescribes  the  pun- 
ishment. 

A  hearing  was  had  upon  this  complaint  in  the  recorder's 
court,  and  the  respondent  and  appellant  was  by  the  verdict  of 
a  jury,  found  guilty  as  charged. 

The  questions  riaised  by  the  assignments  of  error,  may  be 
combined  into  the  one  question,  namely:  Has  the  Dairy  and 
Food  Commission,  or  its  inspectors  power,  unuer  the  law,  to 
investigate  the  food  conditions  of  the  Detroit  House  of  Cor- 
rection ? 

On  the  part  of  the  people  it  is  contended  that  ample  power 
is  vested  in  the  inspectors  of  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commis- 
sion to  make  such  investigation,  and  that  in  view  of  the  re- 
fusal of  the  superintendent  to  permit  the  making  of  the  inves- 
tigation, he  had  violated  the  act  above  referred  to.  Atten- 
tion is  called  by  the  People  to  Chapter  76,  Compiled  Laws  of 
1897,  under  the  provisions  of  which  said  institution  was  erect- 
ed, and  is  controlled,  and  especially  to  Section  2156,  which 
providies  that: 

"The  management  and  direction  of  the  said  house  of  correc- 
tion, subject  to  periodical  inspection  by  the  state  authorities,  in 
their  discretion,  shall  be  under  the  control  and  authority  of  a 
Board  of  Inspectors,  to  be  appointed  for  that  purpose  by  the 
Common  Council  of  the  City  of  Detroit  upon  the  nomination  of 
the  mayor." 

It  is  urged  by  the  prosecution  that  under  this  section  alone 
the  state  has  a  right  to  inspect  the  institution,  and  that  the 
right  of  inspection  by  any  state  authority,  is  here  given;  that 
authority  to  inspect  this  institution  is  made  still  plainer  by 
the  Pure  Food  Laws  of  the  state;  that  Sec.  6  oi  the  Act  creat- 
ing the  office  of  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  and  defining 
his  powers  and  duties   (C.  L.  4978,  as  amended  by  Act  12,  Pub. 


DAIRY   AND    POOD    LAWS.  186 

Acts  of  1905),  states  that  such  commissioner  or  his  deputy,  or 
any  person  appointed  by  him  for  that  purpose. 

"shall  have  power,  in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  to  enter 
into  any  creamery,  factory,  store,  salesroom,  drug  store,  or 
laboratory,  or  place  where  they  have  reason  to  believe  food  or 
drink  are  made,  stored,  sold  or  offered  for  sale  and  open  any 
cask,  tub,  jar,  bottle  or  package  containing  or  supposed  to  con- 
tain, any  article  of  food  or  drink,  and  examine  or  cau&e  to  be 
examined  the  contents  thereof,  and  take  therefrom  samples  for 
analysis." 

Attention  is  also  called  to  Sec.  4  of  the  Amendatory  Act  of 
1905,  which  provides  that  the  inspectors  shall  have  the  same 
right  to  access  to  the  places  to  be  inspected  as  the  said  com- 
missioner or  his  deputy. 

A  reading  of  the  entire  of  Sec.  6,  above  referred  to,  shows 
that  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner,  his  deputy  or  inspect- 
ors, shall  regulate  filthy  and  unsanitary  conditions  which  may 
exist  in  the  operation  of  any  bakery  or  other  places  where 
"any  food  or  drink  products  are  manufactured,  stored,  de- 
posited  or   sold   for   any   purpose   whatever." 

It  was  admitted  upon  the  trial  of  the  case  that  a  bakery 
was  maintained  in  the  institution  to  bake  bread  for  the  prison- 
ers, at  the  time  complained   of. 

Sec.  5029,  Compiled  Laws  of  1897  makes  it  the  duty  of  the 
Dairy  and  Food  Commissioner  of  the  state  to  investigate  all 
complaints  for  violations  of  the  act  known  as  the  General  Pure 
Food  Law,  and  especially  it  is  made  the  duty  of  the  food  in- 
spectors in  the  cities  to  examine  all  complaints  made  to  them 
of  violations  of  the  act. 

On  the  part  of  the  defendant  and  appellant  it  is  contended 
that  the  act  creating  the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Commission, 
and  the  amendments  thereto,  together  with  Act  No.  167  of  the 
Public  Acts  of  1899,  did  not  confer  the  right  upon  the  State 
Dairy  and  Food  Commission  or  its  inspectors  to  inspect  the  food 
conditions  of  a  public  or  state  institution  such  as  the  Detroit 
House  of  Correction. 

It  is  urged  by  defendant's  counsel  that,  by  the  terms  of  the 
act  creating  it,  the  institution  is  used  for  the  confinement,  pun- 
ishment   and    reformation    of    criminals,    or    persons    sentenced 


186  STATE    OF   MICHIGAN. 

thereto,  under  the  laws  authorizing  the  confinement  of  con- 
victed persons  in  the  House  of  Correction;  that  the  manage- 
ment and  direction  of  the  said  House  of  Correction  subject 
to  periodical  inspection  by  the  state  authorities  is,  by  statute, 
placed  under  the  control  and  authority  of  a  board  of  inspectors 
appointed  by  the  common  council  of  the  city  of  Detroit  upon  the 
nomination  of  the  mayor;  that  this  board  of  inspectors  is  author- 
ized and  empowered  by  the  common  council  to  make  rules  for  the 
regulation  and  discipline  of  the  House  of  Correction,  and  to 
appoint  a  superintendent;  that  under  the  statute  the  superin- 
tendent has  entire  control  and  management  of  all  its  concerns 
subject  to  the  authority  established  by  law,  and  the  rules  and 
regulations  adopted  for  its  government. 

It  is  contended  by  the  appellant  that  the  Detroit  House  of 
Correction  is  not  any  one  of  the  places  named  in  which  the 
state  dairy  and  food  commissioner  or  his  inspectors  are  au- 
thorized to  enter;  that  the  institution  is  not  a  creamery,  fact- 
ory, store,  etc.,  or  a  place  where  the  inspectors  would  have  rea- 
son to  believe  food  and  drink  are  made,  stored  and  offered  for 
sale,  within  the  meaning  of  the  statute. 

An  examination  of  the  statutes  relevant  to  this  subject  has 
led  us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  public  penal  institutions  of 
this  state,  including  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction,  are  not 
within  the  purview  or  terms  of  the  statute  relating  to  the  Gen- 
eral Pure  Food  Law.  The  legislature  has  provided  a  visitorial 
board  whose  duty  it  is  to  inspect  these  institutions  and  make 
due  report  thereon.  As  early  as  1871  provision  was  made  for 
a  commission  to  be  appointed,  subsequently  called  "The  Board 
of  Corrections  and  Charities,"  of  which  the  governor  is  ex 
oflacio  a  member.     Sec.  2252,  Compiled  Laws  reads  as  follows: 

"The  said  commissioners,  by  one  of  their  number,  or  by  their 
secretary,  shall,  at  least  once  in  each  year,  visit  and  examine 
into  the  condition  of  each  and  every  of  the  city  and  county  poor- 
houses,  county  jails,  or  other  places  for  the  detention  of  crim- 
inals or  witnesses  and  the  said  board  or  a  majority  thereof,  with 
their  secretary,  shall,  at  least  once  in  each  year,  visit  and  ex- 
amine the  reform  school,  state  prison,  Detroit  house  of  correc- 
tion, and  state  and  county  asylums  for  the  insane,  and  the  deaf, 
dumb  and  blind,  and  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  actual 
condition  of  the  institutions  by  them  or  either  of  them  visited, 


DAIRY    AND    FOOD    LAWS.  Ig7 

the  method  of  instruction,  government,  or  management  there- 
in pursued,  the  official  conduct  of  the  superintendents  or  other 
officers  and  employes  in  charge  thereof,  or  connected  therewith, 
the  condition  of  the  buildings,  grounds,  or  other  property  there- 
unto belonging,  and  the  facts  as  to  all  other  matters  in  any  man- 
ner pertaining  to  the  usefulness  and  proper  management  of  the 
institutions,  poorhouses,  and  jails  above  named.  They,  or  either 
of  them,  and  their  secretary,  shall  have  free  access  thereto  at 
any  and  all  times,  and  shall  have  authority  to  administer  oaths 
and  examine  any  person  or  persons  in  any  way  connected  with 
or  having  knowledge  of  the  condition,  management,  and  disci- 
pline of  such  institutions,  jails  or  poorhouses,  as  to  any  mat- 
ters or  inquiries  not  contrary  to  the  purposes  or  provisions  of 
this  act."       J 

Attention  is  called  to  the  remaining  portions  of  this  statute: 

An  examination  of  the  statutes  relating  to  the  government 
of  the  state  prisons  and  reformatories,  the  powers  and  duties 
of  boards  of  control  and  of  the  wardens  of  the  institutions,  will 
show  that  these  officers  have  plenary  power  and  control  over 
all  matters  relating  to  the  government  of  the  institutions,  in- 
cluding food,  medicine,  clothing,  bedding,  etc. — everything  which 
pertains  to  the  health  and  well-being  of  the  inmates.  With  these 
ample  provisions,  and  the  added  power  of  visitation  lodged  in 
the  Board  of  Corrections  and  Charities,  it  does  not  seem  to 
us  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  legislature  that  this  ground 
was  also  to  be  covered  by  the  Dairy  and  Food  Commission.  In 
our  opinion,  that  commission  has  no  jurisdiction  over  these  in- 
stitutions, but  its  right  to  inspect  is  limited  to  the  store,  etc., 
of  the  manufacturer  or  vendor  of  food  or  drink  products,  which 
are  made,  stored,  sold  or  offered  for  sale  to  the  general  public. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  language  relied  upon  by  the  People 
in  the  Amendatory  Act  of  1905,  defining  the  several  places, 
where  inspection  may  be  made  by  the  dairy  and  food  commis- 
sioner, is  specific  in  designating  certain  places,  to-wit:  Cream- 
ery, factory,  store,  salesroom,  drug  store  or  laboratory,  follow- 
ed by  the  general  words,  "or  places  where  they  have  reason  to 
believe  food  or  drink  are  made,  stored,  sold  or  offered  for  sale." 
This  general  language  must  be  construed  as  meaning  places  of 
the  same  kind,  of  the  same  general  character  or  sort  as  those 
named. 

Although   it   appears   in   this   record    that   the   Detroit   House 


188  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN. 

of  Correction  bakes  its  own  bread  for  its  inmates,  and  for  that 
purpose  may  be  said  to  operate  a  bakery,  yet  it  does  not  seem 
to  us  that  such  a  place  can  be  covered  by  any  of  the  specific 
words  mentioned.  Certainly  it  is  not  a  creamery,  factory,  store, 
salesroom,  drug  store  or  laboratory,  as  those  words  are  used 
in  the  statute.  The  general  rule  should  here  apply  that  when 
after  the  enumeration  a  statute  employs  some  general  term  to 
embrace  other  cases,  the  other  cases  must  be  understood  to  be 
cases  of  the  same  general  character,  sort,  or  kind,  with  those 
named.  In  other  words,  "they  are  known  from  their  asso- 
ciates." 

Brooks  vs.  Cook,  44  Mich.,  617-619,  and  cases  cited; 

Roberts  vs.  City  of  Detroit,  102  Mich.,  67; 

Drake  vs.  Industrial  Works,  174  Mich.,  662. 

We  are,  therefore,  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Detroit 
Housie  of  Correction — a  state  penal  institution,  with  its  super- 
intendent, and  its  board  of  inspectors,  subject  to  the  visita- 
tion of  the  Board  of  Corrections  and  Charities — is  not  embraced 
within,  and  was  not  intended  to  be  embraced  within,  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Pure  Food  law,  and  that  the  inspector  had  no 
authority  to  enter  the  premises.  Whenever  the  legislature  de- 
sires to  clothe  the  Pure  Food  Commission  with  such  authority  it 
will  doubtless  so  express  itself.  We  think  it  has  not  done  so 
in  the  past  legislation.  Reaching  this  result,  that  conflict  in 
jurisdiction  of  the  different  boards,  which  would  lead  to  an 
unseemly  contest,  is  avoided.  The  conviction  must  therefore  be 
reversed,  and   the  defendant  discharged. 

Ostrander,  Kuhn  and  Moore,   JJ.,  concurred  with  Stone,  J. 

Brooke,  C.  J.:  Mr.  Brother  Stone  in  the  earlier  part  of  his 
opinion  states  very  clearly,  the  contentions  made  on  behalf  of 
thie  people  in  this  case.  It  is  claimed  that  the  dairy  and  food 
commissioner,  or  his  deputy,  is  authorized  to  make  the  inspec- 
tion, which  was  denied,  upon  two  grounds: 

1st.  Under  the  act  creating  the  Detroit  House  of  Correction, 
Sec.  2   (C.  L.  1897,  Sec.  2156),  which  provides: 

"The  management  and  direction  of  the  said  house  of  correc- 
tion, subject  to  periodical  inspection  by  the  state  authorities  in 


DAIRY   AND    FOOD   LAWS. 


their  discretion,  shall  be  under  the  control  and  authority  of  a 
board  of  inspectors,  to  be  appointed  for  that  purpose  by  the 
common  council  of  the  city  of  Detroit." 

It  is  claimed  on  behalf  of  the  people  that  this  language  used 
in  the  law  of  its  creation  is  broad  enough  to  warrant  the  in- 
spection of  said  institution  by  ANY  state  authority.  In  my 
opinion  the  contention  is  fully  warranted  by  the  language  used. 
It  would  be  difficult  to  select  words  of  more  general  import 
than  those  used   in  the  statute: 

'^subject  to  periodical  inspection  by  the  state  authorities  in  their 
discretion." 

No  particular  state  authority  is  pointed  out,  nor  is  the  right 
of  inspection  limited  to  any  such  particular  authority.  There  is 
no  doubt  that  included  among  the  state  authorities  entitled 
to  the  right  of  inspection  is  the  State  Board  of  Charities.  It, 
how€ver,  by  no  means  follows  that  the  exercise  of  the  right 
by  that  board  exhausts  the  authority  of  the  state  under  the 
language  of  the  section  above  quoted.  It  seems  to  me  clear 
that  the  labor  department  might  v^ry  properly  inspect  the 
institution  to  determine  whether  proper  safety  devices  were 
employed  as  provided  by  the  general  laws  of  the  state  touching 
that  subject.  The  State  Board  of  Health,  too,  should  have 
authority  to  inspect  and  determine  whether  the  laws  relating 
to  sanitary  conditions  were  being  obeyed  therein.  And  closely 
akin  to  the  necessity  for  such  inspection  is  the  necessity  for 
inspection  by  the  State  Dairy  and  Food  Department  in  order 
that  it  may  be  determined  that  the  food  served  is  wholesome  in 
quality. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  institution  is  one  of 
considerable  magnitude  within  the  walls  of  which  are  confined 
several  hundreds  of  prisoners,  male  and  female.  The  female 
prisoners  therein  are  boarded  at  the  expense  of  the  state  and 
many  counties  of  the  state  having  individual  contracts  with 
the  institution,  by  the  terms  of  which  a  per  diem  amount  is 
paid  for  the  board  and  medical  attendance  of  each  prisoner. 

Several  industries  are  carried  on  in  the  institution  requiring 
the  use  of  machinery.  In  my  opinion,  it  is  an  institution  pe- 
culiarly requiring  the  supervision   of  every  department  of   the 


190  STATE    OF    MICHIGAN., 

state  whose  activities  are  directed  to  securing  to  the  inhabit- 
ants thereof  sanitary  conditions,  wholesome  food,  and  freedom 
from  danger  to  life  and  limb  through  the  use  of  improperly 
guarded   machinery. 

If  there  could  be  any  doubt  of  the  right  of  the  people  to 
insist  that  the  dairy  and  food  commissioner,  or  his  deputies,  is 
authorized  to  make  the  inspection  which  was  denied  in  the  in- 
stant case,  it  is  disposed  of  by  a  reading  of  Section  6  (C.  L., 
1897,  Sec.  4978),  of  the  law  creating  that  department.  That 
section  authorizes  the  entry  of  the  commissioner,  or  his  depu- 
ties, to  certain  named  places  and, 

"or  places  where  he  had  reason  to  believe  food  or  drink  is  made, 
stored,  sold  or  offered  for  sale." 

In  my  opinion  it  is  idle  to  say  that  the  House  of  Correction 
is  not  such  a  place.  Whatever  may  be  said  of  other  penal  in- 
stitutions of  the  state,  this  particular  institution  stores  food 
in  large  quantities,  which  it  sells.  The  record  shows  that 
during  the  year  it  received  the  very  considerable  sum  of  $32,- 
659.00  for   the  board   of  prisoners  confined  therein. 

It  is,  in  a  sense,  in  the  business  of  selling  food.  The  fact 
that  its  customers  happen  to  be  the  state  itself  and  several  po- 
litical divisions  of  the  state,  makes  no  difference  in  the  prin- 
ciple involved.  It  would,  I  think,  scarcely  be  contended  that  a 
hotel,  keeping,  storing,  and  offering  food  for  sale  to  its  guests  was 
not  subject  to  the  inspection  provided  for  in  the  act  creating 
the  Dairy  and  Food  Department.  In  any  event  I  think  such 
a  construction  of  the  legislation  is  too  narrow  and  I  quite  agree 
with  the  opinion  expressed  by  the  learned  judge  who,  in  re- 
fusing to  charge  as  requested  by  the  respondent,  said: 

"I  refuse  to  give  this  request  to  charge,  gentlemen  of  the 
jury,  upon  the  ground  that  it  is  my  opinion  that  the  spirit  of 
the  Dairy  and  Food  Law  is  to  procure  and  secure  proper  food 
and  drink  for  all  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  state.  That  is  its 
general  purpose  and  scope.  And  that  the  terms  of  the  act  creat- 
ing the  Dairy  and  Food  Commission,  the  acts  amendatory  there- 
to, are  broad  enough  to  include  the  Detroit  House  of  Correc- 
tion and  all  other  penal  institutions." 

The   judgment   of   the   court  below  should   be   affirmed. 
McAlvay,  Bird  and  Steere,  JJ.,  concurred  with  Brooks,  C.  J. 


DECEPTIVE    ADVERTISING 


Act  No.  276,  Public  Acts  1913. 

An  act  to  regulate  and  ]>iohibit  false,  deceptive,  fraudu- 
lent and  misleading-  advertising  in  newsi)ai)ers, 
periodicals  or  other  publications,  oi*  by  circulars  or 
handbills. 

The  People  of  the  State  of  Michigan  enact : 

Section  1.  Any  person,  firm,  corporation  or  asso- 
ciation, or  the  agent  or  manager  of  any  such  firm, 
corporation  or  association  who,  with  intent  to  sell  or 
in  anywise  dispose  of  merchandise,  securities,  service  or 
anything  offered  by  such  person,  firm,  corporation  or 
association,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  the  public  for  sale 
or  distribution,  or  with  intent  to  increase  the  consump- 
tion thereof,  or  to  induce  the  public  in  any  manner  to 
enter  into  any  obligation  relating  thereto,  or  to  acquire 
title  thereto,  or  an  interest  therein,  knowingly  makes, 
publishes,  disseminates,  circulates,  or  places  before  the 
public,  or  knowingly  causes  directly  or  indirectly  to  be 
made,  published,  disseminated,  circulated  or  placed  be- 
fore the  public,  in  this  State,  in  a  newspaper  or  other 
publication,  or  in  the  form  of  a  book,  notice,  handbill, 
poster,  bill,  circular,  pamphlet,  or  letter,  or  in  any  other 
way,  an  advertisement  of  any  sort  regarding  merchan- 
dise, securities,  service  or  anything  so  offered  to  the 
public,  which  advertisement  contains  any  assertion, 
representation  or  statement  of  fact  which  is  untrue,  de- 
ceptive or  misleading,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty- 
five  dollars  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  or  by 
imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a  period  of  not  more 
than  ninety  days,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprison- 
ment in  the  discretion  of  the  court :  Provided,  That  the 
publisher  or  printer  of  any  newspaper  or  other  periodi- 
cal shall  not  be  liable  under  this  act  for  publishing  de- 
ceptive advertising  received  from  any  other  person : 
Provided  further,  That  said  printer  or  publisher  is  not 
aware  of  the  deceptive  character  of  the  advertising  so 
received. 


INDEX. 


diijaiffiair  uainj  vrnuiur  •ctrtjminf. 


INDEX. 


Section  Page 

ADULTERATION  OF  FOOD  PRODUCTS 23  19 

food  defined 24  19 

articles  when  adulterated .'..'.  25  19 

articles  when  misbranded 25  20 

APPROPRIATION  (see  drug  appropriation  p.  70) II  il 

tax  levy 12  12 

BABCOCK  TEST: 

milk  samples  for  testing,  how  to  be  taken 151  72 

"standard  Babcock  testing  glassware"  defined 152  72 

specifications  of  standard  milk  test  bottles '. 152  72 

specifications  of  standard  cream  test  bottles 152  73 

specifications  of  50%  9  gram  short-neck  bottles 152  73 

specifications  of  50%  9  gram  long-neck  bottles 152  74 

specifications  of  standard  Babcock  pipette 152  75 

specifications  of  butter  fat  and  cream  scales 152  75 

unlawful  to  manipulate  Babcock  test 153  76 

penalty  therefor 154  76 

BAKERIES: 

commissioner  to  enforce  cleanliness 6  7 

penalty  for  permitting  insanitary  conditions  to  exist 6  8 

BUCKWHEAT  FLOUR: 

buckwheat  flour  compound,  how  labeled 44  29 

prima  facia  evidence  of  intent 46  29 

taking  of  orders  deemed  a  sale 47  29 

penalty 48  29 

repealing  clause 49  30 

BULLETINS: 

to  be  issued  monthly,  what  to  contain 9  10 

BUTTER:     (See  renovated  butter). 

lawful  butter  defined 26  21 

penalty  for  selling  unlawful  butter 26  22 

standard  for  butter 100  48 

unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  butter  prohibited 172  87 

penalty  therefor 172  87 

State  Brand  for  butter 230  109 

use  and  regulation  of  brand  controlled  by  commission 231  109 

duties  and  powers  of  commission 232  109 

Dairy  and  Food  Department  to  publish  rules 233  110 

Dairy  and  Food  Department  to  furnish  stamp  for  brand 233  1 10 

design  of  trade  mark  or  brand 234  1 10 

license  to  be  obtained  from  Dairy  &  Food  Department 235  110 

Commissioner  may  revoke  license 236  111 

use  of  imitation  brand  prohibited 237  111 

penalty 238  111 

CANDY: 

adulteration  of  candies 103  50 

penalty 104  50 

CANNED  FRUIT  AND  VEGETABLES: 

soaked  or  bleached  goods,  how  labeled 36  26 

25 


194  INDEX. 


Section 

CARBONATED  BEVERAGES,  SYRUPS,  EXTRACTS  AND 
SOFT  DRINKS: 

licensing  of  carbonated  beverages  and  soft  drinks 218 

licensing  of  syrups  and  extracts 219 

sample  to  be  furnished  for  analysis 219 

Commissioner  may  revoke  license 220 

Commissioner  must  notify  licensee  before  revoking  license 221 

licensee  may  appeal  from  decision 222 

ingredients  of  carbonated  beverages,  soft  drinks,  etc 223 

standard  for 223 

artificially  colored  or  imitation  drinks  must  be  so  labeled 224 

labels  for  imita  tion  drinks,  etc 224 

sanitary  conditions  where  manufactured 225 

sterilization  of  bottles 226 

kind  of  bottle  to  be  used 227 

penalty  for  violation 228 

CERTIFIED  MILK: 
act  providing  for  the  incorporation  of  medical  milk  commissions 

and  certification  of  milk  produced  under  their  supervision 

medical  milk  commissions  how  appointed 190 

duties  of 190 

term  of  office * 190 

number 190 

removal  by  board 190 

to  file  certificate 190 

contents  of  certificates 191 

how  to  be  executed 192 

association  to  be  styled  "Medical  Milk  Commission" 193 

salary  or  emolument  prohibited 195 

powers  of  medical  milk  commissions 196 

containers  of  milk  to  have  certificate  bearing    name    of   medical 

milk  commission 197 

methods  of  milk  commission  to  be  investigated  by  Board  of 

Health 198 

illegal  sale  of  certified  milk  prohibited 199 

penalty 200 

CHEESE:     (See  dairy  products). 

lawful  cheese  defined 27 

penalty  for  selling  unlawful  cheese 29 

full  cream  cheese  defined 27 

full  cream  cheese  may  be  so  branded 28 

skimmed  milk  cheese  defined 27 

skimmed  milk  cheese  to  be  branded 28 

places  where  skimmed  milk  cheese  is  sold  or  used  to  display  pla- 
card    30 

Eenalty  for  not  displaying  placard 30 

rands  for  cheese,  how  obtained 29 

commissioner  to  keep  record  of  cheese  brands 29 

fee  for  full  cream  cheese  brands 29 

penalty  for  falsely  branding  cheese 29 

CHEESE   FACTORIES: 

must  register  annually 16 

penalty  for  non-registration 16 

registration  fee  may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  courts.  ...  215 

must  pasteurize  by-products 242 

CLERKS: 

comm  issioner  to  appoint 4 

CLEANLINESS    OF   CREAMERIES,    CHEESE   FACTORIES, 
MILK  DEPOTS,  ETC.: 

duties  of  commissioner  in  enforcing  same 6 

COFFEE  AND  COFFEE  SUBSTITUTES: 

imitations,  adulterations,  etc 37 

coffee  compound,  how  labeled 37 

COMMISSION  MERCHANTS: 

commission  merchants  defined 173 

farm  produce  defined 173 


INDEX. 


195 


COMMISSION  MERCHANTS— Continued: 

commission  merchants  must  obtain  licenae 174 

method  of  procedure 174 

complaints  to  be  investigated 175 

license  may  be  revoked 176 

action  of  commissioner  subject  to  review  by  writ  of  certiorari. .  177 

commissioner  shall  publish  list  of  names 178 

dispositon  of  license  fees 179 

dairy  and  food  commissioner  to  investigate  complaints  of  ship- 
pers of  farm  produce 180 

misdemeanor  of  commission  merchants  defined 181 

penalty  for  failure  to  account,  etc 181 

penalty  for  failure  to  license 183 

exemptions 182 

CONDENSED   MILK: 

act  in  relation  thereto 

fornmla  for  extending  necessary  on  label 83 

penalt v  f<jr  violat  ion 84 

CONDENSED  MILK  FACTORIES: 

registration  and  report  of 16 

penalty 16 

registration  fee  may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  court...  .  215 

CONFECTIONERIES:     (See  ice  cream  plants). 

CORN  SYRUP:     (See  glucose  mi.xture). 

corn  syrup  defined 108 

how  to  be  labeled 108 

name  and  percentage  of  ingredients  to  appear  on  label 108 

other  requirements  in  labelling 108 

penalty 109 

CREAM: 

.  standard  for 101 

specifications  for  standard  cream  test  bottles 152 

penalty  for  falsely  manipulating  Babcock  test 153 

specifications  for  cream  scales 152 

unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  cream  prohibited 172 

penalty  therefor 172 

must  be  sold  in  standard  milk  bottles 239 

penalty  for  violation 240 

CREAMERIES: 

must  register  and  report  annually  to  dairy  and  food  commissioner  16 

penalty  for  non-registration 16 

registration  fee  may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  court 215 

must  pasteurize  by-products 242 

DAIRY  AND  FOOD  COMMISSIONER: 

appointment  and  term  of  office 1 

removal  and  vacancy 2 

oath  of  office  and  bond 3 

salary  and  expenses 4 

appointment  of  deputy 4 

appointment  of  clerks 4 

appointment  of  inspectors 4 

appointment  of  state  analyst  and  assistant 5 

duties  of  commissioner 6 

power  to  examine  articles  of  food  and  drink 6 

may  call  for  assistance  of  prosecuting  attorney 7 

annual  report  and  monthly  bulletins  to  be  published 9 

penalty  for  obstructing  (see  also  page  17) 10 

to  investigate  complaints,    (see  also  page  89) 42 

to  issue  butter  brands 233 

DAIRY  PRODUCTS: 

duties  of  commissioner  in  relation  thereto 13 

Impure  and  unwholesome  milk 14 

penalty  for  furnishing  same  to  creameries,  cheese  factories,  con- 
densed milk  factories,  etc 14 

26 


Section   Page 


89 
90 
91 
91 
91 

91 
92 
92 
92 
92 

41 
41 
42 

14 

15 

103 


52 
52 
52 
52 
52 

49 
73 
76 
75 
87 
87 
111 
112 

14 

15 

103 

113 


3 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

5 

6 

7 

10 

10 

11 

28 

110 

12 
13 

13 


106 


INDE3t. 


Section  Page 


DAIRY  PRODUCTS— Continued: 

sanitary  condition  of  creameries,  cheese  factories,  etc 15 

proprietor  to  be  notified  and  warned 15 

penalty  for  permitting  insanitary  conditions  to  exist 15 

DECEPTIVE  ADVERTISING: 

penalty  therefor 1 

exemptions 1 

DEPUTY  DAIRY  AND  FOOD  COMMISSIONER: 

appointment  of  deputy  commissioner 4 

bond,  oath  of  office  and  salary 4 

right  of  access  to  places  to  be  inspected 4 

DRUGS: 

drugs  defined 138 

drugs  when  adulterated 139 

does  not  apply  to  physicians'  prescriptions 140 

articles  when  misbranded 140 

false  or  fraudulent  statement  relative  to  curative,  etc.,  effects.".  140 

rules  and  regulations 141 

duties  of  commissioner  in  relation  thereto 142 

appointment  of  analyst 142 

appointment  of  drug  inspectors 142 

power  to  take  samples 142 

guarantee  of  purity,  when  protection  to  dealer 143 

guarantee  of  purity,  when  not  protection  to  dealer 143 

drugs  manufactured  in  state  for  export 144 

prosecuting  attorney  to  render  assistance 145 

penalty  for  violation  of  the  act 146 

appropriation 147 

drugs  or  medicine  adulterated  so  as  to  be  injurious  to -health, 

prohibited 

EGGS: 

unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  eggs  prohibited 172 

penalty  for  violation 172 

EXTRACTS:  (See  CARBONATED  BEVERAGES,  ETC). 

FARM  DAIRY:     (See  dairy  products). 

FOOD:     (See  adulteration  of  food  products). 

FRUITS  AND  VEGETABLES: 

closed  package  defined 206 

closed  packages,  how  to  be  marked 207 

closed  packages  not  salable  unless  marked 208 

misrepresentation  not  permitted 210 

penalty  therefor 211 

fresh,  exempted  from  net  weight  law 25 

GRAPES:     (Table). 

an  act  to  regulate  the  packing  for  shipment  and  sale  thereof.  ...  212 

penalty  for  violation 213 

GLUCOSE  MIXTURE,  MOLASSES,  ETC:    (See  corn  syrup). 

ICE  CREAM: 

ice  cream,  when  adulterated 117 

standard  for  ice  cream 118 

false  labeling  or  branding 119 

state  license 120 

may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  courts 215 

disposition  of  license  fee 120 

penalty  for  violation  of  the  act 121 

dairy  and  food  commissioner  to  enforce  act 122 

ICE  CREAM  PLANTS: 

commissioner  to  enforce  cleanliness 6 

penalty  for  permitting  insanitary  conditions  to  exist 6 

INSANITARY  MILK  AND  CREAM: 

act  in  relation  thereto 


4 
5 
4 

65 
65 


69 
69 
70 

114 


101 
101 
101 
102 
102 
21 


103 
103 


56 
57 
57 
57 
103 
57 
58 
58 


38 


INDEX.  107 


Section  Page 
INSANITARY  MILK  ANX)  CREAM— Continued: 

milk  defined 77  38 

cream  defined 77  39 

insanitary  milk  defined 77  39 

insanitary  cream  defined 77  39 

sale  of  insanitary  milk  or  cream  prohibited 78  40 

unlawful  to  manufacture  any  article  of  food  from  insanitary  milk 

or  cream • 79  40 

insanitary  premises  and  utensils 80  40 

cans,  bottles  and  other  containers  to  be  washed  before  returning.  81  41 

penalty  for  violation  of  the  act 82  41 

INSPECTORS: 

how  appointed  and  number 4  4 

bond  and  oath  of  office 4  5 

power  to  administer  oaths 4  4 

term  of  office 4  4 

salary  and  expenses 4  4 

right  of  access  to  places  to  be  inspected 4  4 

JELLY  AND  FRUIT  BUTTER: 

imitations,  how  labeled 35  25 

imitations  not  to  be  colored 35  26 

penalty 35  26 

LARD : 

lawful  lard  defined 31  24 

labeling  of  lard  imitations 32  24 

packages  containing  lard  substitutes  to  be  labeled 33  25 

possession  of  unlabeled  lard  substitutes 34  25 

LINSEED  OR  FLAXSEED  OIL: 

linseed  or  flaxseed  oil  defined 130  61 

how  marked  or  branded 131  63 

linseed  oil  compound  or  flaxseed  oil  compound 132  63 

samples,  how  taken 134  64 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 135  64 

MAPLE  SYRUP  AND  MAPLE  SUGAR: 

see  Pierre-Viaus  Maple  Co.  vs.  Arthur  C.  Bird,  et  al 1<2 

when  adulterated 112  54 

manner  of  labeling 112  54 

penalty  for  violation 113  54 

MILK:     (See  certified  milk.) 

milk  defined 77  38 

insanitary  milk  defined 77  39 

sale  of  insanitary  milk  prohibited . . .  t ■  78  40 

unlawful  to  manufacture  any  article  of  food  from  insanitary  milk.  79  40 
milk  bottles,  cans  and  other  containers  to  be  washed  before  re- 
turning   81  41 

penalty  for  violation 82  41 

milk  samples  for  testing,  how  to  be  taken 151  72 

penalty  for  manipulating  Babcock  test 153  7* 

unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  milk,  prohibited 172  87 

penalty  therefor 172  87 

standard  for  pure  milk 72  36 

penalty  for  adulteration  of  milk 74  37 

skimmed  milk  to  be  labeled 71  36 

testing  of  milk 73  37 

penalty  for  selling  skimmed  or  adulterated  milk 74  37 

sale  of  adulterated  milk 75  J» 

penalty  for  violation 76  38 

-  sold  in  standard  bottles 239  111 

specifications  of  standard  milk  test  bottles l-^S  72 


198 


INDEX. 


MILK  BOTTLES:  Section 

unlawful  for  any  driver  or  distributor  of  milk  to  open  containers 

during  process  of  delivery 204 

penalty  therefor 205 

size  of  standard  milk  bottles 239 

variations  allowed 239 

how  marked 239 

bond  of  manufacturer 239 

records  kept 239 

penalty 240 

inspectors  of  weights  and  measures  not  required  to  seal  bottles. .  241 

MILK  DEPOTS: 

owners  or  managers  to  register  with  and  report  to  dairy  and  food 

commissioner 16 

registration  fees  may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  courts.  .  .  .  215 

MILL  PRODUCTS: 

weight  or  measure  of  barrel  or  fractional  part  thereof  prescribed  123 

barrel  or  fractional  part  thereof  to  contain  full  weight 124 

stamping  or  branding  of  packages 125 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 125 

MIXTURES  OR  COMPOUNDS: 

what  constitutes 25 

must  bear  name  and  address  of  manufacturer 25 

MOLASSES: 

how  labeled 37 

when  containing  glucose,  how  labeled 37 

size  of  letters  used  in  labeling 37  ■ 

NET  WEIGHT: 

net  weight 25 

fresh  fruit  and  vegetables  exempted 25 

OLEOMARGARINE:     (See  supreme  court  opinion). 

labeling  of  butter  substitutes 86 

duty  of  persons  selling  substitutes 87 

placard  to  be  used  when  sold  or  furnished .  . 88 

terms  unlawful  to  use 89 

oleomargarine  defined 91 

butter  defined 90 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 92 

coloring  of  oleomargarine  unlawful 94 

penalty  therefor 95 

ingredient  color  (see  case  Bennett  vs.  Carr) 

oleomargarine  or  butter  substitutes  prohibited  in  public  institu- 
tions except  in  penal  institutions 202 

violations  made  misdemeanors 203 

.  penalty  therefor :....* 203 

PASTEURIZATION: 

by-products  of  cheese  factories,  creameries,  etc.,  to  be  pasteurized.  242 

penalty 243 

PEPPER: 

standard  for  black  pepper 106 

penalty  for  violation 107 

PLACES    WHERE     FOOD     OR    DRINK    ARE     MANUFAC- 
TURED, SOLD,  ETC: 

to  be  kept  in  sanitary  condition 6 

commissioner  to  enforce  provisions  of  section  in  relation  thereto  6 

penalty  for  failure  to  keep  clean  and  sanitary 6 

POULTRY: 

unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  poultry  prohibited 172 

penalty 172 

PRESERVATIVES: 

act  in  relation  thereto 110 

PROSECUTING  ATTORNEY:     (See  also  pages  28,  69). 

to  assist  commissioner 7 


Page 

100 
100 
111 
112 
112 
112 
112 
112 
113 


14 
103 

58 
59 
59 
60 

19 
21 

27 
27 
27 


43 
43 
44 
44 
44 
44 
45 
45 
46 
158 


113 
114 


7 
7 
8 

87 
87 

53 

10 


INDEX. 


190 


REGISTRATION  FEEvS: 

Tiiay  be  collocled  by  civil  suit  in  state  court 215 

RENOVATKI)   RUfTER:     (Sec  butter). 

renovafcci  butter  defined 96 

how  tubs,  firkins,  etc.,  shall  be  labeled 97 

manner  of  hibeling  when  exposed  for  sale  in  mass 97 

manner  of  labeling  prints,  rolls,  etc 97 

size  of  type  to  l)e  vised 97 

cannot  be  concealed  from  view 97 

placard  to  be  used  where  furnished 97 

penalty  for  violation 98 

repealing:  clause 99 

SAUSAGE: 

act  in  relation  thereto 

unlawful  to  sell  adulterated  sausage 155 

sausage  or  sausage  meat  defined 156 

adulterated  sausage  defined 157 

penalty  therefor 158 

SEIZURE  OF  ADULTERATED  GOODS: 

when  goods  may  be  seized 7 

duty  of  person  making  seizure 7 

sample  to  be  taken  for  analysis 7 

state  analyst  to  analyze  same  and  certify  results 7 

commissioner  or  person  duly  authorized  to  make  complaint 7 

justice  to  issue  summons 7 

time  for  appearance 7 

when  defendant  cannot  be  found 7 

shall  proceed  as  in  case  of  attachment 7 

judgment,  how  rendered 7 

right  to  appeal 7 

disposition  of  proceeds 7 

SKIMMING  STATIONS: 

owner  or  manager  to  register  and  report  to  dairy  and  food  com- 
missioner    16 

penalty  for  violation 16 

may  be  collected  by  civil  suit  in  state  courts 215 

must  pasteurize  by-products 242 

SOFT  DRINKS:     (See  carbonated  beverages,  etc.). 

SPICES:     (See  Pepper). 

STATE  ANALYST  AND  ASSISTANT: 

how  appointed 5 

who  eligible 5 

oath  of  office 5 

term  of  office 5 

laboratory 5 

absence 5 

salaries  and  expenses,  how  audited  and  paid 5 

chemical  supplies 5 

unlawful  for  analyst  to  furnish  certificates  of  purity 8 

to  make  reports  on  samples  analyzed 7 

SYRUPS:     (See  Carbonated  Beverages,  etc.). 

TABLE  GRAPES:     (See  Grapes). 

TURPENTINE: 

act  in  relation  thereto 

enforcement  of 149 

penalty 150 

UNLAWFUL  DISCRIMINATION: 
unlawful  discrimination  in  purchase  of  poultry,  eggs,  milk,  cream 

and  butter  fat  prohibited 172 

penalty 172 


Section  Page 


103 

46 
47 
47 
47 
47 
47 
47 
48 
48 


14 

15 

103 

113 


10 


70 
71 
71 


87 
87 


200  INDEX. 


Section  Page 
UNWHOLESOME  FOOD  FOR  ANIMALS: 

act  in  relation  to  unwholesome  food  for  animals 94 

unwholesome  food  defined 187  94 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 188  94 

UNWHOLESOME  PROVISIONS: 

sale  of  diseased,  corrupted  or  unwholesome  provisions  prohibited     ....  114 

penalty  therefor 114 

UNWHOLESOME  VEAL: 

act  to  prevent  and  punish  the  sale  of  immature  and  unwholesome 

calves  and  veal 93 

immature  veal  defined 184  93 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 185  93 

VEAL:     (See  unwholesome  veal). 

VINEGAR: 

vinegar  defined 51  30 

cider  vinegar  defined 52  31 

sugar  vinegar  defined 53  31 

malt  vinegar  defined 54  31 

lawful  vinegar  defined 55  31 

fermented  vinegar  defined 56  31 

distilled  vinegar  defined 57  32 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 58  32 

repealing  clause 59  32 

WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES: 

act  in  relation  thereto 78 

state  standards  of  weights  and  measures  defined 160  78 

dairy  and  food  commissioner  to  be  state  superintendent  of  weights 

and  measures 161  79 

duties  of  state  superintendent  of  weights  and  measures 162  79 

board  of  supervisors  of  counties  and  commissioners  of  common 

councils  of  each  city  may  appoint  a  sealer 163  80 

board  of  supervisors  of  each  county  may  appoint  a  county  sealer.  164  81 

salary  of 164  81 

power  and  duties  of 164  81 

weights  and  measures  to  be  tested  annually 164  81 

incorporated    cities   may    appoint   city   sealer   of   weights   and 

measures 165  83 

how  appointed 165  83 

powers  and  duties  of 165  83 

penalty  for  violation  of  act 166  83 

penalty  for  hindering  or  obstructing  superintendent  of  weights 

and  measures  or  his  deputies 168  84 

penalty  for  impersonating  superintendent  or  his  deputies 169  84 

WEIGHTS: 

act  to  provide  for  the  weights  per  bushel  of  certain  grain,  dried 

fruit,  coal,  vegetables  and  products 85 

WINE.  SPIRITS,  MALT  LIQUOR  OR  OTHER  LIQUOR: 

fraudulent  adulteration  prohibited 114 

penalty  therefor Il4 

SUPREME  COURT  OPINIONS. 

PEOPLE  V.  SNOWBERGER: 

adulteration  of  food — statutory  offenses — intent — police  power. .  115 

PEOPLE  V.  WORDEN  GROCERY  CO: 

constitutional  law^act  to  prevent  sale  of  adulterated  vinegar — 

complaint — reasonableness  of  statute — defense 122 

PEOPLE  V.  DETTENTHALER: 

constitutional  law — passage  of  act  without  enactment  clause — 
constitutional  provision  mandatory — addition  of  clause  by 
Governor — Act  76,  Laws  of  1897,  invalid 128 


INDEX.  201 


GROSVERNOR  V.  DUFFY:  ^^ 

pure  food  law — sale  of  oleomargarine  colored  to  imitate  butter — 

constitutionality  of  act 136 

PEOPLE  V.  SKILLMAN: 
pure  food  law — section    5022,  C.  L.  construed — action   against 

traveling  salesman 140 

PEOPLE  V.  MORSE: 

pure  food  law — sales  by  agents — criminal  responsibility  for  acts 

of  principal 144 

PEOPLE  V.  ROTTER: 
food — oleomargarine   act — constitutional   law — statutes — title — 

object 145 

PEOPLE  V.  PHILLIPS: 

food — adulteration — statutes — oleomargarine — yellow  butter. . . .  149 

PEOPLE  V.  JENNINGS: 

adulteration  of  food — omission  of  ingredients — coloring  matter — 

remarks  of  court 151 

BENNETT  V.  CARR: 

pure  food  law,  Act  22,  P.  A.  1901,  construed — sale  of  yellow  oleo- 
margarine    158 

PEOPLE  V.  HARRIS: 

food — corn  syrup — glucose 162 

PEOPLE  V.  HINSHAW: 

pure  food  law — adulterated  with  harmless  ingredients — Act  193 

P.  A.  1895,  construed 166 

PRATT  FOOD  CO.  V.  ARTHUR  C.  BIRD.  COMMISSIONER.  168 

PIERRE  VIAUS  MAPLE  CO.  V.  ARTHUR  C.  BIRD, 

COMMISSIONER 172 

ARMOUR  &  CO.  V.  ARTHUR  C.  BIRD,  COMMISSIONER.  .  173 

PEOPLE  V.  JACOB: 

state  officers — dairy  and  food  commissioner — ^inspection  of  prisons 

by  statutes— Act  12,  P.  A.  1905 182 


^' 


PanJ  etC»         . 

Bill  __Jjh«— ^Laxt 

GaylordI     \q^S     Of     "th 

stocktflj  -jitchir: 

T.M.  RcQ  " 


M35034 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


m 


